Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Morrissey: ‘If more men were homosexual, there would be no wars’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. DivusAntinous 27 Feb 2013, 1:27pm

    I don’t think thy is true at all. It’s rather absurd actually.

    1. DivusAntinous 27 Feb 2013, 1:28pm

      That*

  2. Well-intentioned comments perhaps, but bollocks. Alexander the Great (OK, bisexual), Frederick the Great, Field-Marshal Montgomery – just off the top of my head.

    It’s tiresome enough when non-gay people make assumptions about men because they’re gay (other than the taste for cock), it’s too annoying when people say such things from the inside.

    Oops, I’ve just realised that’s based on the assumption Morrissey’s gay which, of course, he’s not. My mistake.

    1. PantoHorse 27 Feb 2013, 1:38pm

      It’s also a variation the ‘gays shouldn’t serve in the military’ tripe.

      This kind of stereotyping is nonsense.

    2. Bill Cameron 27 Feb 2013, 2:31pm

      Agreed. It is ridiculous. In addition to those you mention, I think the military culture of Sparta puts paid to Morrissey’s nonsense.

  3. He possibly means well, but I think he’s incorrect on quite a few points and his comments come across as somewhat heterophobic.

    1. Oh! That word again … ‘heterophobic’. It is a favourite accusation of homophobes (though please don’t take that as a reference to you, Evan). Homophobia, as we know, does exist, but does anyone know of any genuine evidence of heterophobia?

      I’ve had the word ‘heterophobic’ thrown at me by heterosexuals for merely supporting equality. If there is no genuine evidence of heterophobia existing then it is a word used to slander gay people and therefore homophobic.

      1. So many types of phobia exist that it comes across to me as unnecessary to demand evidence of any particular sort.

        In the case of “heterophobia”, take it as similar to the historical painting of all men by some feminist women’s groups as exploitative, useless, rapists, etc. Fear and hatred of all members of the group associated by the oppressed group as their oppressors certainly occurs, and its existence does not need to be questioned. Its rationality is another matter, of course.

      2. When you say that war and nuclear weapons are a heterosexual male hobby I.e. Alluding to the idea that all straight men have a drive for mass murdering, I think that is a nasty generalisation based on someone’s sexuality and gender and is hence heterophobic. However you are right that it is a term used without good reason by many homophobic people

        1. James you are heterophobic deal with it man…

  4. Katie kool-eyes 27 Feb 2013, 2:08pm

    While hes stating a very lovely message, I think it’s a bit naive to believe gay = never aggressive toward another

  5. Jock S. Trap 27 Feb 2013, 2:15pm

    I like his statement, though sadly I wish they were true. There may be less wars due to the fact we can be the best (I think) negotiators.

    However sadly there will always be people, men and women, Gay, Lesbian, Bi or St8, who wish to make claim to power any way they could. It’s usually dirty and the more determined will get what they want no matter what the score.

    Sadly it’s the ugly side of humanity… the power greedy.

  6. His comments could have truth in them, but it is only a possibility whereas Morrissey uses the word “would” indicating that he believes there is no doubt that there would be no wars.

    Though, for his theory to be proved correct, every world leader would have to be gay and that would mean a world take-over by the gay community and there’s no possibility of that happening!

    If more men were homosexual there possibly could be as much war, but the reasons for war might be different – less about oil and more about protecting human rights perhaps.

  7. Why do artists assume they have insight beyond their talent –

    There will only be less war in this world when organised Religion/Superstition is abolished –

    Gay men are as capable of killing as hetros are –

    If women worn the historical ‘trousers’ there would have been less war

    Maternity prevents the desire to kill

    1. “If women worn the historical ‘trousers’ there would have been less war

      Maternity prevents the desire to kill”

      That is quite a lot of bilge IMO. Look at Margaret Thatcher, she wasn’t squeamish about war and there have been quite a lot of female cheerleaders for war even if they were not in power. Some of the most effective propaganda of WW1 was created by women.

      Everything you said else I do agree with.

      1. “Everything you said else I do agree with.”

        Oh dear. I don’t know what went wrong with that sentence. Perhaps Yoda am I.

        1. I stating was Historically (mocking) – hoping you would imagine replacing all of history’s genocidal men with Mothers incapable of imagining such atrocities let alone implementing them.

          and you give me the trouser wearing monster – Thatcher – the greatest living argument for mercy killing.

  8. WTF are you smoking Morrisey? Ever heard of Jeffrey Dahmer?

    1. Or Dennis Nilson. I think Morrissey’s comments are rather naive, although good intentioned.

      1. To be fair they were both psychopaths.

        I think what Morrissey is stating is that hetero men of the armed forces are killing for pleasure on a grand scale legally and being rewarded for it. Gay men dont have that natural blood lust to kill another man for a job, they have more sensitivity (of course there is the ‘odd’ nutter).

        We’ve all seen the way American soldiers in particular revel in their kills & yet are not considered psychopaths. So for this one Im on the Mozzers side , although a slightly skewed opinion I get his logic.

        1. Sorry, but when someone’s who’s gay comes out with a line like “gay men … have more sensitivity”, after my initial irritation I just think you need to get out more. It’s bad enough being lumped with stereotypes and generalisations from non-gay people, it’s almost worse coming from the inside.

          The entire basis of the struggle to have gay people included in the armed forces is based on the idea that, when it comes to doing a job, gay people need be no different from non-gay ones.

          1. Nope no need for this one to get out more, you seem to base your assumptions it sounds on a very small minority of bitchy queens – a stereotype in itself (which doesnt make them capable of being cold blooded killers btw).
            Luckily other gay people Ive been around are more intouch with their feelings and sensitivity to others feelings and needs, also not needing to be nasty as a defense mechanism.
            My experience, my opinion & My truth whether you like it or not.
            Certainly not stereotyping, with your tone you seem to be doing a very good job of lumping yourself in with that on your own!!

          2. That’s a very odd remark from someone who admits he assumes all the gay men in the world are like those he knows. I suggest it’s perfectly possible for there to be as wide a variety of gay men as there are non-gay men. A liking for cock presupposes no other common trait.

          3. Paul Essex/London 28 Feb 2013, 2:02am

            @Mijacmad: Yes a lot of OUT gay men are more in touch with their feelings and sensitivity. But that tends to happen as part of the process of being out in a heternormative world such as ours. That’s not something that is brought about by your sexuality but by dealing with the way society treats you because you don’t fit with the social norm. If there were more gay men then the balance would be more equal, gay men would not find themselves outside the social norm and their rights would not be so infringed. Thus taking away the issues most out gay men have to deal with and not requiring the need to be more in touch with ones feelings and sensitivity. Leaving us all to be interested in wealth, power and the bloody business of going about in securing it just like everyone else. I think in order to make sweeping statement like “Gay men dont have that natural blood lust to kill another man for a job, they have more sensitivity” you’d have to know the sexuality of those who do.

        2. Why are gays so sensitive

  9. Well this is complete crap. Not to mention the inherently sexist nature of all the comments he made. It’s really stereotypical as well.

  10. Coffee Drinker 27 Feb 2013, 3:26pm

    Apparently Moz has never been in a fight over the only good looking guy in a gay cruise area. Someone slaughter a chicken in front of him.

  11. maybe there’s some logic on what he said although if the majority of men were gay the amount of bitching would be unbearable !

  12. morrissey’s tongue-in-cheek comment seems to have rocketed over the head of most here. he’s taking the p*ss, a well-intentioned p (intended)! if morrissey is asexual, we shouldn’t ask about jake eh! loved him when i was a sweet boy, but not so much now… just wish he would grow up.

    1. Suddenly Last Bummer 27 Feb 2013, 5:55pm

      Tell us more about Jake…!

  13. What an incredibly stupid thing to say.

  14. Darren Theoret 27 Feb 2013, 3:51pm

    Oh my! I think there would still be wars but they would be better choreographed and the uniforms would be fabulous!

    1. That must be what’s called fighting stereotyping with stereotypes.

      1. Darren Theoret 27 Feb 2013, 4:22pm

        You got me :)

  15. If more men were Morrissey, the world would be one big war – of egos.

    1. And everyone would be very depressed.

  16. Sorry I got lost in a very nice daydream after he said: “If more men were homosexual…”

    Did he say something about war?

  17. Suddenly Last Bummer 27 Feb 2013, 5:52pm

    The gay population could be “larger” by one if Mozzer decided to come out. As a life long fan I’m getting a bit bored of his recent mindless soundbytes, all that Wills & Kate bashing, Bowie slating and now this. Will he just shut the funk up already and release an album of NEW music.

  18. There will always be war on this planet – no matter if we were all gay, straight, muslim, christian, black, white…..

    Human beings just love a fight. And everything else on Earth also fights – to survive.

  19. Franklin E. 27 Feb 2013, 7:21pm

    The Romans and Greeks encouraged homosexuality in their military – they believed that it would have a substantial affect on camaraderie and give the men more of a reason to fight if not to just protect the other men that they are romantically involved with.

    Also, homosexual men can be extremely vicious and cruel. I wouldn’t expect any difference in the amount of wars or violence. based on sexuality. Hitler himself was bisexual – he didn’t care to save all the Jewish men in his genocidal fury.

    Mirrissey’s logic on this issue astounds and offends me.

  20. Patrick Mc Crossan 27 Feb 2013, 7:38pm

    He is so wrong. Gay men are more likely to be a soldier or really like soldiers so hes wrong wrong wrong.

  21. Ben Foster 28 Feb 2013, 3:55pm

    The trouble is, prisons all have their LGBT section of the population. Gay people go over the edge and murder their partners, they get into bar fights etc. like anyone else. It’s downright stupid to state that gay men are not violent as a completely unassailable fact.

  22. Another pearl of twaddle from the man who is beginning to make Prince Philip look positively politically astute. He has obviously never heard of Bohemian Grove.

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.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all