Good to see gold medalist Greg Louganis on the BBC yesterday – http://youtu.be/rEdskZb5MQ0
Thanks for that link. Greg Louganis: a legend.
It’s because there is that few gay people, Twenty to be honest is alot for a sexual minority who’s global percentage of the population doesn’t go beyond 3%.
Stop overestimating things.
If we assume your delusional estimate of 3% is correct, that still means there are potentially over 350 LGBTQ athletes participating in the Olympics.
Forgetting evidence for one moment (which would demonstrate your claim of a 3% ceiling of the global population of LGBT people to be false) …
It seems, Globby, that your ability to carry out basic arithmetic is lacking too.
With approximately 14,000 athletes at the 2012 Olympics – *if* we accept that your 3% is accurate (and I do not) then the number of gay athletes would be way beyond 20 (which you claim is a lot (which you also spell incorrectly!)). Even at 3% that would be around 420 athletes (some 21 times bigger than your estimate!).
Stop underestimating things.
‘Why are there so few openly gay athletes at London 2012?’
I think you need to look at the social/religious attitudes in their home countries.
Maybe because the athletes who people assume are straight are getting better sponsorship deals, making more money. Is there an openly gay athelete at this years olympic games who makes/worth more than Kobe Bryant?? Is there an openly gay athlete at the olympic games that made more than Lebron james this year? or even Roger Federer? I guess in terms of sports it pays not to be Gay. Sorry but its the truth. Peace!!!
The truth, Omar, is that most people don’t actually care.
Why is Pink News perpetuating this cheap, cynical publicity stunt and wet dream that arriving athletes caused Grindr to crash?
This is an insult to the athletes and to our intelligence and gutter journalism of the worst kind.
Grind is an unknown entity in 80+% of the countries represented in the Olympics, so why the remaining 20% would be clamouring to get onto Grindr as soon as arriving at the Olympic Village simple beggars belief, assuming intelligent, focused athletes would even know what this trashy app is!!
And if as the report says many of the homosexually-inclined contingent are coupled anyway, then really this cheap slur that implicates all the athletes competing needs to be nipped in the bud once and for all.
Your phrase “homosexually-inclined” gives the game away, I’m afraid.
Another homophobic (and religious?) bigot trolling gay news sites.
I can not find the phrase “homosexually-inclined” anywhere in this article other than in SamuelB’s comment. I find it highly unlikely Prof Woods (a well respected commentator on LGBT issues) would use such clumsy language.
The article briefly mentions Grindr which SamuelB latches onto and then seems to seek to malign the article as though it is purely about Grindr – it is not, it is much more about issues of gay athletes at the Olympics.
I see no slur in this article, other than the slur SamuelB uses in their suggestion that people may be “homosexually-inclined”.
Many times I have wondered if SamuelB is actually gay or not, they use language which no self-respecting gay person is likely to ever use.
And Samuel B, in a later post, talks about ” a choice to accept and embrace the gay lifestyle”
QuIte simple, really, Gazza.
Not all HOMOSEXUALLY-INCLINED people choose to buy into the narrow and often shallow construct that is a gay lifestyle choice for those who do.
Sexuality is proven to be fluid and we’re all capable of embracing shades of grey.
But, in applying the labels we do – gay, straight, whatever – we limit ourselves and filter out any conception or possibility of experiencing anything that doesn’t fit within the narrow confines of said box.
That is not to say some of us aren’t exclusively homosexuality-inclined, or gay as a lifestyle choice, but societal pressure to put everyone in tidy little boxes marked straight and gay forces many to conform to such pressures, which are particularly strong in our world and particularly, it must be said, these boards.
@ Samuel B
Are you equally against those people who chose to embrace the straight lifestyle?
Who the feck said I am against anyone, dimwit.
If you mean do I think people who define themselves as straight are limiting their full potential of human experience, then hell yeah!!!
Works both ways, obviously.
I am gay.
I am not homosexually inclined.
My orientation is not a choice or inclination.
My interaction with (or lack of) any aspect of the gay scene or gay politics has no relevance to my orientation.
Orientation is neither an inclination or choice.
Gay is a social construct that you choose to buy into, which is your right.
But that does not make anyone else with same sex attraction but who chooses not to buy into the same construct gay.
I have had the acquaintance of many men who enjoy same sex manoeuvres, some exclusively, others married or in relationships with women.
And they most certainly do not identify with anything the gay lifestyle offers.
And when you think of all the many shallow and self-gratifying pursuits it does have to offer these days, who can honestly blame them?
And yes, the sex is invariably is far more passionate, meaningful and naturally flowing than the mechanical approach that appears to be becoming par for the norm in the on-tap Grindr age.
Samuel B, you’re worse than some of the religio-trolls we used to be plagued with here when it comes to your association of being [openly] gay and “gay lifestyle”. You seem to have a failure of the imagination when it comes to imagining the two aren’t inextricably intertwined, but I assure you they aren’t. I have plenty of gay friends who do not conform to some weird concept of “gay lifestyle” though they (and I) are unquivocally and unashamedly gay in that our primary orientation is towards people of the same sex.
Oh and when it comes to sex, as you’ve probably discovered, there’s nothing like a bit of repression to make people passionate.
In other words, Vince, you are an exclusively homosexual man you identifies as gay.
I am a gay man because I am homosexual, because I find men attractice, because I have a husband I adore.
My being gay is nothing to do with the bars I frequent, the political views I have, the campaigning I am involved with or my perceptions about anything.
We are gay-identified men because we each have a gay sensibility which some describe as a Gaydar and others describe as idiosynchracies unique to us.
Many same sex-attracted people don’t, simple as that.
Out of interest I googled “homosexual inclination”, guess what I found?
Over 95% of the entries linked to this phrase were related to religious bodies, predominantly Roman Catholic.
Why would someone use that phrase, one has to wonder!
Well, Daniel, as you have just reduced the percentage to less than 86 – entirely on your own – I Dunn. Why would someone want to use that phrase?
Especially as over 50 per cent of the uses on the religious links were from gay campaigners?
Why are you concentrating on one sentence of the article, SamuelB?
How do you define “homosexually-inclined”, SamuelB?
Would you say it is about having a “tendency”, “preference”, “choice” or “disposition” ?
Is it similar to a tendency to enjoy football, classical music, spicy food, modern art etc? Is it that sort of preference, choice, alternative?
I don’t think so.
Homosexuality, being gay, is not a choice – not a preference – not an inclination – not an alternative – not a disposition. Orientation is an aspect of the character of each individual. Orientation impacts on the personal relationships that individuals have (although some may choose to suppress it). Sexual orientation is not a matter of choice, it is primarily neurobiological at birth.
Coming out is often an important psychological step for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. Research has shown that feeling positively about one’s sexual orientation and integrating it into one’s life fosters greater well-being and mental health. This integration often
involves disclosing one’s identity to others; it may or may not also entail participating in the gay community. Being able to discuss one’s sexual orientation with others also increases the availability of social support, which is crucial to mental health and psychological well-being. Like heterosexuals, lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people benefit from being able to share their lives with and receive support from family, friends, and acquaintances. Thus, it is not surprising that lesbians and gay men who feel they must conceal their sexual orientation report more frequent mental health concerns than do lesbians and gay men who are more open; they may even have more physical health problems.
Is that a serious question, Daniel286?
Are you so rooted in defining your sexuality as gay that you cannot possible perceive the sexual fluidity that is proven to be inherent in most human beings, except the extreme minority at each end of the sexual spectrum who are biologically exclusively homosexually or heterosexually inclined?
You seem to be the one rooted in defining others sexuality and condeming it
Well, estimates generally say that something like 5% of the human population is gay (more for men, less for women). Even 5% is massively more than twenty out of twelve thousand.
But OPENLY gay people are perhaps a different matter. Worldwide, I can kind of believe that perhaps less than a fifth of the gay cohort are open about it. Or, at least, open about it to the extent that it would become public knowledge were they placed in the limelight. Some might just not have mentioned it.
I don’t know if anyone has ever come up with figures, either globally or by nation, for what fraction of the gay cohort is actually out in any meaningful sense. I suspect that the figure for Olympic athletes would be lower than for the general population at large, but how much lower we simply cannot say.
So is this mainly about societal attitudes to sportspeople, then, or is it the same general things that lead to not being out in the population at large?
The author also makes the tired assumption that anyone who prefers sleeping with others of the same sex also makes a choice to accept and embrace the gay lifestyle, which in fact many, many do not.
What is wrong in maintaining discretion over your sexual preferences? Gay is a recent construct and lifestyle concept that many same sex-attracted people feel no connection or identity with.
Many gay people choose to behave in ways that are identifiably gay, dress and style a different way, and slot into stereotypes that form their own tribes largely cut off from each other, be it bear, twink, drag queen, muscle Mary.
By calling for all same sex-attracted people to come out as gay when they feel no infinity for a community which is itself at times inherently homophobic towards one another is a little like demanding the Pope come out as Jewish!
Anyone ever heard the phrase “Just live and let live”?
It would be nice for gay people to “live and let live”, but it wasn’t that long since they were imprisoned for being “queer”. It wasn’t that long since being gay categorised you as being “mental” (World Health Organisation and national health boards). It was only recently that there have been people murdered for being gay. Sports stars are good role models, but few of them “come out” because they know what hostility they’ll face. Gay athletes from Russia? Did you see people being abused and arrested at gay pride in Russia? There are so many reasons for them to come out, and while it would be lovely to think it doesn’t matter; it most certainly does matter to ensure equality (not tolerance) but equality in society.
Can’t quite work out what your problem is but you do seem to have one.
Where does the report demand that people should come out?
What it does is question why people do not come out – perfectly legitimate questions – to which there may be perfectly legitimate answers as to why they have chosen to not come out.
Of course many people (gay and not) behave in very many different ways – that is the joy of the variety of human existance. Fortunately, not all are like SamuelB, nor all like me or like David Cameron, Lady Gaga, Ben Ainslie, Hope Powell or Zara Phillips.
Whilst it is beneficial to others that people are comfortable and willing to come out, that should always be an individuals choice and decision.
Asking why some people choose not to be, is not pressurizing them – it is asking a legitimate question, and may come up with answers that lead to changes in society that make people more comfortable and make a different choice to come out following those changes.
Plenty of people have found it possible to come out without ‘embracing the “gay lifestyle”‘(whatever you think that is) – I doubt Peter Mandelson, David Laws, Lord Alli, Lord Browne, Anthony Sher and Russell Tovey spend their time trapped in your idea of a ‘lifestyle’.
You seem to have a rather limited and very negative idea of the possibilities open to gay people, SamuelB.
Perhaps that is because SamuelB believes being gay is a negative thing – most of his posts seem to suggest this.
This can only be the result of someone who is seeking to attack LGBT people or is uncomfortable in their own orientation and see’s attacking others as a legitimate tool to protect themselves.
It just makes his comments look trite and ignorant.
What are you talking about?
Each and every one of these gay-identified gentlemen embrace elements of the gay lifestyle, unless you know something that is clearly not evident when either of them are on the TV being interviewed!
Just discussing the fact that they are gay in media interviews – and having at some point made made a conscious and momentous decision to come out as such – means they opted to live a gay life, does it not?
Obviously it is in the gay lobby’s interests that more people follow their lead, and this is where I believe the frustration lies.
We need the numbers to bolster our fight for equal rights, but the fact remains that most homosexually-inclined people choose not to define themselves as gay, or to “come out” as the activists demand.
Leave these people alone to live their lives as they choose.
Moaning and bitching about the lack of out spokespeople or whatever is hardly likely to endear them to our cause…
Really? What elements of “the gay lifestyle” does David Laws “embrace”? Genuine question – you seem to know so much more about this “gay lifestyle” and and how it’s “embraced” than I do.
You seem to make a tired assumption that coming out means that one engages with the gay scene. It does not. It merely means expressing ones sexual preference.
“a choice to accept and embrace the gay lifestyle”
There are as many possible gay lifestyles as there are straight ones. Which particular gay lifestyle do you have in mind?
Clearly it is wise for athletes to hide their sexuality at least until their individual competitions are finished. To do otherwise, especially if your competition is depending on points from judges would not be prudent, as you don’t know whether or not some or any of the judges are homophobic or religious freaks. It is bad enough when sour grapes (as in the case of the young Chinese swimmer) rears its ugly head, without having to deal with the homophobes as well. Quite a lot of older people in sport , Judges and coaches etc, are religious and some of them rabidly so… ….. ….
It’s probably because they are focused on their sports. It’s probably not important enough to them to make a song and dance about it, the sport take priority and dominates their life.
What a silly A.S.
Good point A.S.
They are in fact representing their countries as athletes, not LGBT ambassadors.
Social and religious attitudes aside, the attitude could be the games come first.
I totally agree with A.S. Why should there be more gay athletes ? It’s not like LGBT people are special and need to advertise their identity everytime and everywhere, we LGBT people are like any other normal people and being LGBT shouldn’t be our main identity.
I know I risk accusations of stereotyping but isn’t it unwise to approximate how many Gay athletes there are by unreliable population guesstimates? I would imagine there are higher proportions of GLBT people in the arts, retail, fashion, academe, travel etc than in construction, highway maintenance, mining, haulage and, possibly, sport.
And why do you think that is? Could it be the way people who’re “different” have historically been channelled into certain fields? And in any event I think what you speak of is people who’re openly gay. Which brings us back to the point of this article.
No, I don’t believe I am speaking only of people who are openly Gay. The professions I mention were attractive to Gay men when homosexuality was illegal and very few were open about themselves. It cannot be denied that though all of us grow up in isolation from each other there are often common sensibilities. I’m sure there are both positive and negative reasons that make many Gay people highly creative. There is considered to be a high instance of genius in gay people. I certainly don’t feel channelled.
I work as a civil engineer in highway construction – and I most certainly am gay. I was not channelled into my profession. I am out in all aspects of my life and have had great acceptance from colleagues (at all levels) including some very hearty banter (which I reciprocate) when out on site.
Sorry Cal, I just don’t believe in this ‘gay people are creative’ malarkey, and I would love it if you could point me towards credible research that evidences a high instance of genius in people, or rather men (as I think you’re referring to), based on their sexual preferences.
A generation and more ago young gay men would have been advised against seeking a career in the law, or at the very least they’d have been made to feel unwelcome (as I suspect many athletes would even today). Now, not only is there a gay High Court judge but Clifford Chance puts on exhibitions to celebrate Pride. I think you’ll find that as stereotypes break down so will assumptions about what careers are possible if, bluntly, you have a taste for cock.
Haha. Freddie Laker, founder of the ill-fated airline, used to say he liked aviation because there were no gays in the aircraft industry. I wonder if he was right.
Tell that to Michael Bishop, Baron Glendonbrook.
I feel sorry for the gender variant athletes.
The religious anti-gay agenda relies on denying the existence of “sexual orientation” – it suits their position that “no-one is born gay”
Ian Thorpe: ‘I’m sick of denying gay rumours’
I guess they are there because of their sporting credentials and expertise and not their sexual prowess or personal lifestyle.
Athletes aren’t always natural celebrities, of course they all want the world to see and recognise their achievements but that doesn’t mean they want their private lives on show to the world. An athletes career is improved through their own skill not through publicity, too much of that could even put them off their training.
I mean just look at that tweet Tom Daley got sent about his father passing which was extremely private. It’s not just homophobia here, when you are in the public eye people will judge and even say despicable things about many aspects of your life which is none of their business.
It’s completely understandable that many athletes just want to keep their sexuality out of the public eye, they could be happily out to there friends and family but just not need to be out to the world and that should be respected.
It is true that publicly out athletes are very hard to find. Direct homophobia may not be the cause of their silence—rather, there is a sense among gay competitors that sexuality should not dominate discussions of athletic skill. In short, as gay athletes become more public, the relationship of sexuality and sport becomes more complex. For gay athletes at the Games, it continues to be the case that being out will often overshadow one’s athletic accomplishments. There are still very few openly gay Olympic athletes.
The endless questions that will follow an athlete even suspected of being gay provide some competitors with a serious incentive to keep quiet about their identities, preferring to avoid distraction from their elite performances in the sporting arena.
While acceptance of LGBT people has increased rapidly during the past couple decades, being gay retains a huge stigma in athletics. Being a gay male is seen as a sign of effeminacy and a contrast to the virility necessary to
succeed in men’s sports; being a lesbian in athletics also has a stigma, but a different stigma that isn’t necessarily seen as contradicting a woman’s athletic ability.
Some schemes are helping to reduce the stigma of being a gay athlete, but there still are no openly gay players in any of the U.S.’s big four (male) pro-sports leagues, the English Premiership or most major sports leagues globally. Given the uncomfortable environment for gay athletes in the U.S., UK, Spain and elsewhere, it’s understandable that a closeted athlete in a less accepting country, such as El Salvador or Egypt, would be even less likely to come out.
However, the Olympics represent putting aside wars, politics, and other differences to come together on a worldwide stage for a friendly competition. The Olympics are the perfect opportunity for those opposed to homosexuality to drop their prejudices, if only momentarily, to rally behind a gay or lesbian athlete representing their country. But that seems
unlikely when so few openly LGBT athletes are in the Olympics, and even more so when all but one are from Europe, the United States, and Australia.
Not only would having more out males in the Olympics reduce the stigma of homosexuality, but it would also address the specific stigma of being a gay male athlete. Being an out Olympian sends the message that “I’m one of the best at my sport in the world and, by the way, I happen to be gay.” It serves as an inspiration to young gay, bisexual, and questioning youth who are into sports and tells them that they, too, can excel even if people question their masculinity and athleticism because of their sexual orientation. But with only three openly gay men (though I’m sure there’s more than three total) in the Olympics, there are few opportunities to send that message.
Coming out is a personal choice, but as long as gay Olympic athletes are safe doing so, then making the decision to be out would act as an encouragement to others.
I don’t see any point in knocking the whole of the UK educational system because Daley got bulllied by a few teenage bigots. I’m a teacher in London and while there is still ways to go, hompohobia in our country is not nearly at the alarming levels in other countries around the world. I played football in the US and came out at around 30. The truth is while I was playing, coming out wasn’t a priority. I knew I’d have to face up to it at some point and “the right time was the right time.” Yes, it would be nice if there were more out gay athletes, but as I said most come from countries where it simply isn’t tolerated. Those young athletes from more tolerant countries like ours – well, let them come out when they choose. Just because we now live in a more tolerant society doesn’t mean youngsters still don’t fear coming out. All of us should reflect on our coming out and how we felt when we had to do it as “kids” before we start banging our drum for the new generation to come out.
Of course we should reflect on our own experiences, and we should acknowledge and be aware of the frustrations, fears, concerns and insecurities that some young people may have – and that some may wish to choose not to come out (for a wide range of reasons, some of which most people would completely understand and perhaps some that would not be – whether understood or not, that choice remains equally valid).
However, we should strive to move beyond our own experiences and seek to “Inspire a Generation”. That means improving the experience that young people have in a wide range of areas -sport, education, aspirations etc etc and also in reducing fear, apprehension, insecurity and anxiety. Part of that can be achieved from role models demonstrating they are confident in who they are as individuals (including their orientation).
Obviously we need the numbers to bolster our fight for equal rights, but the fact remains that most homosexually-oriented (I get the message on the word “inclined”) people choose not to define themselves as gay, or to “come out” as the activists demand.
Moaning and bitching about the lack of out sportsmen or whatever is hardly likely to endear them to our cause…
Who is moaning or bitching, apart from you?
I thought this was a discussion and seeking to understand why gay men in sport have chosen not to come out.
You are the only one bitching that I can see.
Samuel, please try and understand where this is coming from. Generally speaking, people do not hide fundamental things about themselves – their nationality, marital status, profession, parental status, address, holiday destination, colour of hair, skin, eyes etc. The secrecy that many gay people still live under is a hangover from the ages of shame which, thank goodness, we seem to be coming through now. Those of us who live our lives in the open (and you don”t have to go to clubs and be a bear or whatever to do that) are helping to advance our cause. This is a choice, of course, but don’t try to make it sound normal and healthy that people in the public eye, including athletes, should hide. People live in the closet because of fear and shame.
It seems SamuelB believes being gay is shameful
Good to see you getting on so well with many other PN contributors Samuel – I wondered why you have not been your usual vocal self in other recent stories, too busy having to defend your very odd world view I see!!!
I note that other contributors describe you as a homophobic troll – surprising considering you claim to be so popular, but there again who can you trust, it’s all a conspiracy lol!!!
You miss the point entirely W6.
You laugh at me because I think differently and outside of the box.
And I laugh at you because you all think the same.
I have no intention of conforming, jumping into line or joining the group think concensus because the PC thought police who patrol these boards don’t or can’t grasp alternative concepts or shades of grey that challenge their narrow and limited worldview.
I don’t want to end up writing in a robotic monotone because I am merely repeating parrot-like what I have been indoctrinated into believing is the only explanation for any given situation.
Some of the best thinkers and philosophers are those who were once vilified for simply speaking their mind, and the passage of time subsequently proved them right all along.
The just deceased Gore Vidal springs to mind here.
I maintain my right as an individual to think how I want in a world where freedom of thought is itself being criminalised by stealth.
Amen to that!
I totally get the point Samuel – you are deluded probably of the grandiose type.
And by the way, W6, you get on famously with just about everyone, don’t you?
Let’s see, in the last couple of weeks alone you have been told to “back off” by Elaine and reprimanded by Stu (ok, we now know that Elaine is Stu’s drag alter ego, but the charge still stands).
And last week you riled and provoked JD into calling you a “patronising, condescending prick” replete with “bitter queen turn of phrase”.
Now, I have been called various things on here, granted, but never have I invited THAT level of wrath!
Pot, kettle, black?
…..lol when have I ever suggested I am popular with other contributors, how many times do I have to say that I do not comment to be popular, but rather to provide balance to your warped views on all things HIV. in your typical selective way JD also stated in the same comment “by all means inform and educate in your replies” & to be frank I found his comment rude & aggressive -we can’t all be Mr popular as you have clearly demonstrated recently.
You are the one Samuel who claims that the majority of PN readers are in ageement with your views & that we are to expect an uprising because everyone has your rather bizzarre world view. I have news for you sunshine no one gives a to$$ about your views because the way you put them across. You are a devisive, manipulative all round ignorant troll & a self confessed bully – no commentator has ever felt bullied by me, yet you have consistently subjected both myself & another commentator to personal attacks & aggression – totally shameful!
W6, are you ridiculous enough to believe I throw myself to the lions on here to be popular??!!
Do you really think I entered this particular debate expecting to receive a warm reception?
If so you are far dimmer than even I wagered!
The one subject matter that I AM in accord wIth most of my gay brethren is regarding the failure of HIV charities, as you well know.
As ever selective with your criticisms, but then I suppose you have to make up for your lack of oratory and elocution skills by going for the jugular.
And where in this entire debate have I bullied anyone, pray?
That’s the cry of the intellectually compromised coward, who cannot win an argument with the limited number of words of two or less syllables at his disposal:- to retaliate with the cry of “bully”.
As a relative newcomer to these boards, I have to say your arrival has lowered the general tone of these parts.
PS: I note how you backed out of the debate on the new £6m+ allocation of HIV prevention funding to the THT once LongtermPWA began posting.
Ah yes, one of the many long-term PWA you claim to be communing with.
Well good to see that even they are not ignorant to what is really going on behind the scenes…
I have clearly answered all your ridiculous accusations on that particular issue – debate? you don’t know the meaning of the word. Debate is a broader form of argument, though logical consistency, factual accuracy & some degree of emotional appeal to the audience are important elements of the art of persuasion. In all the HIV debates you fail on logical, factual & accuracy on the subject matter – with you it is all emotional appeal, all headline & no substance.
You are a bully Samuel both myself & another commentator have been at the sharp end of your aggression & bullying – you cannot deny this as it is clearly demonstrated in many of these comments pages.
As a relative newcomer – is there a Hierarchy? Is this your little club? Seems you like to think so, but as I have mentioned you are DELUSIONAL!
……aside from correcting your out of date views on HIV the following will be my standard phrase in response to your smears – “Pi$$ off you homophobic irritating tw@t”
The Peter Tatchell Foundation is campaigning against homophobia in the Olympics. Homophobia is being permitted by the IOC in direct violation of the Olympic Charter.
The Peter Tatchell Foundation is calling on the IOC to enforce the Olympic Charter:
1. All competing nations should be required to sign a pledge that they do not discriminate in sport on the grounds of gender, ethnicity, religion/belief, sexual orientation or gender identity. If they refuse to sign, they should be denied participation in the games.
2. Jacque Rogge and Lord Coe should make a public statement that lesbian, gay, bisexual and trangender (LGBT) athletes are welcome at London 2012 and that participating nations must not discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation.
For more information, please read Peter Tatchell’s open letter to Lord Coe (Chair of LOCOG) and Jacques Rogge (President of the IOC) here:
News from Peter Tatchell Foundation:
Homophobia & the Olympics
Public Meeting Sat 4 August 11am to 12 noon, with the Federation of Gay Games, the European Gay & Lesbian Sport Federation, the Gay & Lesbian International Sport Federation & many others.
Venue: Pride House, at the CA (Cruising Association) House, Limehouse Basin.
For details of Pride House: http://pridehouse2012.org/
As a YMCA coach for years, I’m convinced that gender separation is there to prevent pregnancy, not sex.
Its not hard to figure out why people are reluctant to come out, look at the abuse Tom Daely and subsequently one of his abusers, got.
As usual, the absolute worst thing one man can call another is gay.
“(what a comment on the values instilled by the UK educational system!)”
Talk about a flippant statement.
As a trainee teacher, I am a little offended by this remark; I regularly see myself, and my colleagues around me, rewarding pupils for outstanding personal achievements – be it an educational or extra-curricular one – and punishing those who attempt to belittle those who have done well.
Please don’t tar us all with the same brush – granted, there may be some practioners who fall into the category you describe, and there’s no excuse for the behaviour Tom Daley was subjected to at school. But such a broad generalisation of our education system is crass and unfounded.
What a pointless story.