Reader comments · Ian McKellen: ‘Margaret Thatcher misjudged the future with Section 28’ · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Ian McKellen: ‘Margaret Thatcher misjudged the future with Section 28’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The irony is that she did it to protect herself from attacks by her own right wing and the right wing press.

    It didn’t work. It wasn’t the opposition that got her in the end it was the tories themselves. They are just as ruthless today.

  2. Section 28 was sheer evil.

    The world rejoices that Thatcher is dead.

    She was evil homophobic scum.

    1. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2013, 2:30pm

      Yes Section 28 was evil and just damn wrong but I do have to say that had all this nasty hysteria about Thatchers death, been about another divisive figure such as Peter Tatchell in death, how very different and hypocritical some here would be!

    2. Section 28 is alive and well and living in Singapore.

      1. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2013, 3:36pm

        Yep, and Section 28 and any equivalent really has no place in any society.

      2. .. and don’t forget that bastion of free-thinking and equality for all, Russia. Amazing to think that a country which still hangs on to its Communist past (by way of its current dictator) now shares so many of Margaret Thatchers ultr-right wing ideals. Mind you, she did behave as a dictator – so she and Putin have a LOT in common.

      3. And Republican state Senator Stacey Campfield from Tennessee is repeatedly trying to pass a bill called “Don’t Say Gay”

    3. Spanner1960 17 Apr 2013, 12:28am

      Don’t hold back mate, say what you *really* think.

  3. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Apr 2013, 2:29pm

    And prey tell, what would the BBC know about decency and taste? It’s never aired one balanced programme for equal marriage but defers to the opposition every time.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Apr 2013, 2:30pm

      pray tell…

  4. I wish that all she’d done was misjudge the future. The plain fact is that for many of us, at least in the short to medium term, she decided it and plunged countless numbers of our brothers and sisters into years of unnecessary and undeserved unhappiness. If I believed in hell I’d say that she should rot in it.

  5. On The Other Hand 16 Apr 2013, 2:38pm

    That’s interesting to know. She also voted for decriminalisation. But she was prepared to endorse nasty homophobia. What a complex woman.

    1. She was not complex.

      She believed that it was a waste of money to jail gay people.

      But she believed we were 2nd class citizens and was more than happy to inflict enormous pain on our community.

      She was vile scum.

      And she led a party of vile scum (the majority of whose MP’s still believe we are 2nd class citizens.)

    2. de Villiers 16 Apr 2013, 6:33pm

      Well no-one can accuse you of being complex, SteveC.

  6. At Last, someone other than Peter Thatchell is speaking out about Section 28. Although Sir Ian was very outspoken about this at the time with the group Stonewall
    I also have an issue with the fact that right up until the mid 2000’s, Cameron was still campaigning for the RETURN of Section 28 and yet, in 2009, on his campaign trail, he officially apologised for his party’s stance on Gay rights….

    1. So would you prefer that Cameron was still supporting the return of Section 28 and that he hadn’t apologised for it??

  7. Why did you accept the honour? Maybe you were too polite to refuse it, but could it have been that hard to show some integrity?

    It’s a long time ago and obviously Ian McKellen has a done a lot of great work in schools more recently, but if you really hated the legislation as much as I do, you would have turned down any honour arranged by Mrs. Thatcher.

    1. Spanner1960 17 Apr 2013, 12:38am

      Some people see beyond party politics and demonstrate a sense of patriotism and national pride.
      He is a Knight of the British Empire, not some ministerial gong.

  8. As a U.S. citizen, I was not aware of Section 28, and the horrors it inflicted on my British Brothers.

    But, as much as it may give an outlet for vilifying Thatcher, perhaps it would be better if a page out of George Orwell’s novel 1984 were were enacted within the gay community and spread to our supporters; declaring Margaret Thatcher an “unperson”.

    1. As an American, I am of course impressed with British Royal Ceremony since 1954. I was also impressed with the tribute paid to Winston Churchill who had been, to us, Britain itself under siege. I am simply disgusted to see the ceremonial hypocrisy being dumped on Thatcher, a reactionary hack harridan and tragical escort to our own fraud-actor, Ronald Reagan. Do I understand correctly that this common clog of dirt is to be entombed with the likes of Shakespeare?

  9. Spanner1960 17 Apr 2013, 12:36am

    Whilst I in no way condone Section 28 and it’s repercussions, I think a lot of people here were too young to remember what led up to that act.

    The likes of ‘Red’ Ted Knight in Hackney and Derek Hatton in Liverpool, dubbed the “loony left” were hell-bent on ridiculously over the top PC rules, and one of these was the direct promotion of homosexuality.

    I am all for equality and teaching kids an awareness of sexuality, but these guys were pushing it way too far, and the Tories knee-jerk reacted and slammed S28 in place.

    It was the wrong thing to do, and caused a lot of upset, but in hindsight I can see why they did it, even though I would never support it.

    1. You can see why they would want to inflict suffering on gay people simply because ‘of a knee jerk reaction’?

      You’re messed up.

  10. Today I’m having a news blackout and reading “Jenny Lives with Eric and Martin”. Who remembers the furore that caused and how it was used by the departed one to promote what was originally clause 26? One of my first political acts was to join Claws Out.

    Thatcher: you didn’t win!

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.