Reader comments · Former police chief Lord Dear: Same-sex marriage will provoke backlash against gays · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Former police chief Lord Dear: Same-sex marriage will provoke backlash against gays

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Forgive me, Lord Dear, but as an ex-plod, shouldn’t you be asking how your former colleagues can best protect gay people from the backlash you are concerned about/trying to provoke*? (Delete as applicable.)

    1. As an ex-plod, he pUt people in jail for being gay… how can we expect him to be an expert on this?

      1. Christopher Coleman 10 May 2013, 4:26am

        He was only doing his duty. Not a good enough excuse according to Nuremberg precedent.

    2. And back in the 60’s when they locked up men for being gay they were just trying to protect us from out of control violent straights.

      And Oscar Wilde did hard labour to save him from bullying. What a lot we have to be grateful for that so many people have had our best interests at heart.

    3. I tend to think that this ex plod is probably still miffed that his ‘men’ cannot hang around in order to entrap gay men, and boost their crime figures.
      Old habits die hard and it wouldn’t take much for the likes of him to push things back a couple of decades.

  2. I’m not anti-gay but THIS IS JUST TOO FAR. EWW MARRIED MEN EWWW.

    Vague ramblings about nothing. Shush and go away.

  3. Absolutely!
    Giving rights to a minority will most definitely cause those who are bigoted against that minority to react.

    When black people were given equality, was there a “backlash” from those who supported equality for black people? Or was that backlash from those who were AGAINST said equality?

    What an incredibly imbecilic thing to say. I wonder: is one of the requirements for being sent to the house of lords a full frontal lobotomy?

    1. Too right Mikey, Lord Dear’s statement is incoherent and illogical. Where is the evidence for such an assertion?

    2. He seems to be copying the former bishop of Paris. Never a good idea to ape the French.

      I assume he’s studied the backlashes in Canada, Spain, Holland, Argenina etc.

      “Keep to the back of the bus now, or you’ll upset those at the front”

    3. Harry Underwood 12 May 2013, 3:57pm

      There was a backlash here in the U.S. in the 1970s, or at least there was a conservative resurgence post-civil rights, which grew under Nixon and intensified under Reagan. It is most associated with the Southern strategy (the shift of Republican and conservative partisanism to a Southern conservative base of voters) and the transition of the Democratic party from a rural party embracing shades of anti-Communist social democracy for rural voters to a more urban, diverse, immigrant-friendly party embracing post-Cold War social democracy for urban voters.

      Mr. Dear may be correct about backlash politics, but it should not be a strike against marriage equality at this or any time, but against bad behavior, bad faith and bad ideas on the part of lay citizens. If they want their society to go down a hole of due to being irked by the presence of non-conforming individuals utilizing the tools of citizenship at their disposal, then that’s their own fault, not the non-conformants.

  4. Same old stuff :
    “Oh, we don’t really mind them, of course we don’t, we just wish they weren’t so blatant”.
    “Gay people just need to be less visible, then we nice straight people can tolerate their existence.”

    Personally, I’ve never understood the point of marriage, let alone gay marriage, and get a bit depressed by the mimicking of straight marriage by those having civil partnerships. But equality is kind of basic, isn’t it? Something the old copper doesn’t seem to get, which is a little sad.

  5. bobbleobble 9 May 2013, 10:49pm

    Pure drivel. But it’s a novel argument, one of the reasons he’s opposing the bill is to protect gay people! If you say so your lordship.

    Marriage must truly be a weak institution if it is going to be put at such jeopardy by allowing gay people access to it. If it is so pathetically flimsy as these people would have us believe then maybe it should be done away with altogether.

    Also these attacks on the process that the bill has undergone are totally irrelevant. Even if it had undergone every single one of the processes Dear deems necessary he still wouldn’t support it because he doesn’t think gay people should marry, end of debate in his view. I wish these people would stop hiding behind nonsense like this and just be honest.

    And no sir you are not pro marriage. Someone who was genuinely pro marriage would want as many people to benefit from it as possible.

  6. DivusAntinous 9 May 2013, 10:58pm

    Well, if there is a backlash then let them lash all they like. If that really is his concern then we ought to let him and everybody else know that we have the guts to stand up for free and civilised society. Those who don’t will go down as cowards or as the enemies of progress and freedom.

  7. That There Other David 9 May 2013, 10:59pm

    Listen Dear. We can watch our own backs. So how about you pass the Bill and we’ll see whether the public actually care as much as you think they will eh?

  8. That There Other David 9 May 2013, 11:00pm

    Oh, and just because some people, even in the House of Lords, still don’t seem to understand this Tory main manifesto thing:-

    We don’t have a Tory government!!

  9. Threatening a pogrom. Always a great way to show you’re the one with the moral high ground.

  10. This pig was a cop when homosexuality was illegal and gays were harassed and intimidated by the police as matter.

    No wonder he is a threatening thuig

  11. Oh! Dear – of course this has happened in Holland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Norway, Sweeden, Iceland, Canada, Argentina, NewZealand, Rep. of South Africa, Denmark, Paraguay, – No it hasn’t !
    Dear, Suggest you find something else to do for the time this Bill is in the HofL, rather than embarrace yourself further.

  12. Common sense 9 May 2013, 11:15pm

    I’m starting to see a pattern here. Elderly people, mildly religious, Tory voting, from the shires are so totally against equal marriage (as are all their friends) that they believe the whole goddam world thinks like them. Same happened in Scotland though they weren’t Tories there. So, what do we have to fear? Fiercely antigay little old ladies in Chipping Norton scowling at us and muttering? They’ll all be dead soon- that’s the wonder of the demographic cludpff homophobia faces.

    1. Oy! Please don’t confuse all this with ageism and sexism. I’m a ‘little old lady’ and anything but anti-gay (well, being a lesbian, I wouldn’t be, would I) and I know plenty of straight women my age and older (including my 90 year old mother) who are much, much, more determined to fight for gay rights of all sorts including marriage than many younger peoplle, men and women, straight and gay.

      1. Common sense 9 May 2013, 11:51pm

        Don’t worry, I’m not accusing the old of all being homophobic. I know plenty of elderly people in my own family particularly who do not have a shred of homophobia in them.

        But when you look at the polls on equal marriage there is most certainly an age related demographic cliff, with the young overwhelmingly supporting it and the over 65s opposing it.

        Take that along with the huge Tory grassroots backlash in the English shires and the bitter poison coming from parts of rural Scotland where the individuals seem to be convinced that everybody thinks like them and there is going to be some kind of apocalyptic backlash. Well, it just looks like a credible pattern to me.

        I would hazard it is the same type of people that supported the Countryside Movement in opposition to fox hunting though minus most of the youngsters.

        1. OK – but please, not the ‘little old lady’ tag. That is seriously sexist and I don’t think there’s any evidence to suggest that it’s older women rather than older men opposing gay marriage.

          You may be right about it being the Countryside Movement types, but let me assure you that in many rural areas, there is not one shred of support for such people. And it’s not as if there’s no homophobia in cities…..

          1. Common sense 10 May 2013, 4:05am

            Fair enough. It wasn’t intended that way, just a misguided attempt at humour.

    2. Not clear why my earlier response to Common sense isn’t showing. I object to the ageism, sexism and metropolitan-centredness of this. Just because people are old, female and live in ‘the shires’ we are not necessarily Tory or antigay. Some of us are lesbians, in fact. Please don’t demonise other groups. It’s no better to use sexist and ageist language and attitudes than anti-gay ones.

      1. Common sense 10 May 2013, 4:14am

        I am not demonising anyone dear. I come from a rural place myself but that means I am all too aware of the greater prejudice against gay people there than in the urban environment. That is not true of most people there but it is a big enough minority to have an impact.

        Suggest you get of your high horse and stop making unwarranted assumptions. My point was about demographics and nothing whatsoever to do with demonising people. If I said that religious Catholics are more likely to be antigay, would that make me sectarian or religophobic? Of course it wouldn’t, it would just be an observation of certain trends.

        The fact remains that when you break down every poll on gay rights since the late eighties, it has been the younger and more urban and less religious populations that have been the strongest supporters of gay causes with rural elderly populations tending to be less positive and mo conservative. It is not sexist or ageist to observe that.

      2. Common sense 10 May 2013, 4:16am

        Nor is it in any way prejudiced that this distribution has an obvious demographic cliff. So Mr Dear’s presumption that there will be a prolonged backlash is unlikely on several counts.

  13. Oh well that’s ok then , everyone back to sitting at the rear of the bus please!

  14. Ah that old argument – if only we’d know our place (at the back of the proverbial bus) then our existence will be tolerated.

    Thanks Dear, for nothing.

  15. Xavier Bongibault 9 May 2013, 11:19pm

    M. Dear is absolutely right. That what exactly is happen here in France.

    1. That There Other David 9 May 2013, 11:55pm

      All the more reason why it won’t happen here. The British don’t want to ever be seen behaving like the French. All our straight guys will probably marry each other too just to show you lot up.

    2. You suggest we exclude ourselves from society in fear of other people who are threatening and violent towards us? As though the burden is on us to submit to them, not on them to adhere to the law of the land.

    3. It’s certainly true that Dear is copying the incitement tactics used in France by such people of alleged high moral standing as the ex-bishop of Paris, just as Enoch Powell played the race card with his “rivers of blood”. And it’s certainly true that as a result of his efforts, he may well achieve a bit of agro.

      But as has happened in every other country that has equal marriage, the hoo-hah will die out immediately the legislation has passed.

    4. It’s interesting that out of 12 countries, 12 US states, 19 Brazilian states and 3 Mexican states, France is the only place where this amount of hatred and violence has occurred. I think the French need to look a bit deeper into their souls and ask themselves why. Having lived in France for 4 years, my husband and I were not surprised at all. There is a mindless mob mentality in France that lends itself easily to this type of behaviour.

      1. Especially when whipped up by ctholic bishops

    5. Jock S. Trap 10 May 2013, 4:35pm

      Only because you allow religion to do so.

      What happens when you arrest a religious criminal who violently attacks anyone from the LGBT community?

      They suddenly become the victim being ‘persecuted’ by their (chosen) religion.

  16. So thoughtful, worrying about a backlash, worrying about LGBT welfare.

    He will know that denying equality will reinforce homophobia and all that goes with it.

  17. So he blames us for our victimisation? We’re supposed to sit back and be quiet and not upset straight people for fear of violent backlash?

    That’s not equality. That’s fear. That’s not respect, that’s abuse. He expects us to hide and cower for fear of rousing the anger of bigots

    Does he make a habit of telling victims that they’re “asking for it”?

  18. Anthony Sollace 9 May 2013, 11:37pm

    Oh Lord Dear, you yourself a cup of tea!

    The only backlash that has been created is by those who constantly oppose it in a very disrespectful manner.

    The percentage of the very opposing individuals on this matter is a very small percentage and therefore excitingly bearable to every LGBT citizen in the UK.

    We are winning the argument because we are on the right side of the argument.

    Get yourself over it.

  19. Chester666666 9 May 2013, 11:39pm

    Nothing bad has happened where marriage is available so I don’t see what he’s getting at
    Here’s me thinking the police learned t evaluate evidence – he missed that

  20. The Kitty Channel 9 May 2013, 11:44pm

    Another of these people who have graduated from that secret college somewhere that sucks their brain out.

  21. Just shows you don’t have to be very clever to become a Top Plod…

  22. Robert (Kettering) 10 May 2013, 12:56am

    So then Mr Dear, you’d prefer then that the LGBT community crept back inside its closet for another 100 years or so until people with Medieval mind sets, such as yours, can get their hears around the fact that we are born this way and we’re not going away simply to please you!

    My advice to you Mr Dear is: “get stuffed”!

  23. This bit of absurdity by the Lord has got to be the most ridiculous piece of logic I have heard, ever, in a long stretch of riduclous comments made by anti-gay marriage bigots.

  24. Oh Dear Lord.

  25. A former police officer wanting to scrap equality laws, for fear of die-hard bigots breaking the law?
    Last time I saw the police in action, they were not so eagerly climbing over the nearest priest to kowtow to potential criminals. And they certainly weren’t recommending the government do the same.

  26. Robert in S. Kensington 10 May 2013, 2:11am

    The sad thing is, many in the Lords will listen to him so they may well go ahead and reject it point blank. There has been no proactive campaign by supporters to contact the Lords unlike the opponents who are mobilised and have already started an aggressive bombardment of emails, postcards and other forms of communication.

    The fictitious consequences in other countries that he alludes to all bear the hallmarks of C4M, SPUC and other hate groups relying on the support of right wing religious hate groups in America. The very same thing was heard today in the state of Minnesota echoing the same fallacious nonsense citing the Netherlands where marriage supposedly started decline since it became the first country to introduce equal marriage twelve years ago. Hetero marriage has been on the decline for more than 30 years in many western countries.

    No one of course will counter Lord Dear, at least nobody in support of equal marriage.

  27. Robert in S. Kensington 10 May 2013, 2:21am

    Helen Grant said that equal marriage appeared in the Contract for Equalities. I don’t quite understand why in 2010 was said here on PN that it appeared in the manifesto, see below. Why is it that the Contract for Equalities seems to have evaded Lord Dear and by default, the Lords in general? It would seem that the Commons aren’t communicating adequately with the Lords to keep them informed.

  28. Is that a threat?

  29. Michaelandfred 10 May 2013, 3:18am

    So….keep discriminating against us, denying our families rights, cowering in fear to those who hate is, so we won’t be discriminated against, denied our rights and abused?

    Yeah, that makes sense.

  30. Christopher Coleman 10 May 2013, 4:38am

    These characters give the rest of the noblemen a bad name. Those who are anti-gay today will continue so, marriage equality or not. Their usual attitudes will provide the backlash they predict. The rest of society won’t care, as it does not affect their lives. And as several of you have pointed out, there appears to have been no backlash in other countries.

  31. Jacob Dugan-Brause 10 May 2013, 5:55am

    Excuse me, but I have lived with the consequences of hiding far too long.

    I grew up in the 50s and 60s in America and learned that my invisibility protected me against culture taught to despise me. Hiding I feared being beaten, denied jobs, refused housing, respect and love of family.

    I am a member of that first ‘Stonewall Generation’ who finally said ‘No’ to the closet and ‘Yes’ to visibility. We began to live openly and test our fears.

    We demanded laws to treat us equally. When our fears were realised, we demanded to be protected as a citizen’s right, as we should now.

    To those who throw up the past to ‘protect’ us, I say to them:

    I will gladly suffer present wrongs to realise permanent rights in this, my adopted country and our nation.

    I want to be married here, now, to the man I have loved for nearly 35 years.

  32. The gay/same sex/equal marriage debate has being going on in the UK for the last year and a half and there hasn’t been any angry backlash against gays.

    The antis have demonstated against it, Nothing has happenned so far.

    The only hatred being whipped up so far are by the right wing Tories and Christians.

    His whole speech is full of nonsense, 9 in 10 are against SSM??? consequences of SSM abroad???? introducing SSM is a populist political move yet according to him SSM has caused eveyone to flee to UKIP???? No consultation, yet the bill has been in the pipeline and has been consulted upon heavily for over a yr???

  33. 1) Why are we supposed to “look at Uganda” as an example? Is there some sort of unknown correlation between the UK and Uganda that makes it relevant? What about other countries that have allowed this measure to pass and HAVEN’T fallen into civil war and bloodshed?

    2) Marriage has been around for 2,000 years? Does that means Jesus was born out of wedlock? Do the centuries of civilisation before that mean nothing? I suppose that means there were no marriages in Mesopotamia.

    3) Why does it matter if the bill is opposed by all the major religions? Because the government in question, last time I checked, wasn’t a theocracy.

    4) Where is the “9 out of 10” coming from? Who designed that poll? Do you have citation for your statistic?

    5) Why does it matter that the Queen mentioned the Energy Bill ? Yeah, they’re both carryover measures, but that’s like saying a grocery bag is the same as a suitcase.

    Poor argument construction, Lord Dear.

    1. GingerlyColors 10 May 2013, 8:51am

      Jesus WAS born out of wedlock. Mary was supposed to be married to Joseph but he was NOT Jesus’s father. Jesus, the Son of God was conceived through the ‘Immaculate Conception’ in which Mary who was a virgin still become pregnant. Nowadays virgin births are possible through artificial insemination.

      1. To correct an error you are making Ginger: the “immaculate conception” has nothing to do with the “virgin birth”. Mary was not a virgin when she became pregnant.

        The “immaculate” part refers to Mary being without sin. If you want to correct others, make sure you are actually correct yourself.

        Besides! Jesus had two dads and was born from a surrogate mother, and look how he came out!

        1. GingerlyColors 11 May 2013, 11:12pm

          How can Mary be without sin. We are all sinners and the wages of sin is death. If Mary was without sin she would still be alive today!
          By the way I am an agnostic and therefore am open to suggestions that there may be a higher level of existance and the possibiltiy that something will lie beyond our deaths. The Big Bang Theory is something I generally agree with although I still find it hard to work out how our wonderful universe sudddenly appeared out of absolutely nothing 14 billion years ago.

  34. Time to get these bigoted old white men out of politics.

    The House of Lords is a shame – there is no democracy just sickening privilege with their living off the taxpayers.

    I am actually strating to feel sorry for David Cameron – he really does head the party of nasty.

    1. I live in New Zealand where equal marriage is now law, mmmm? haven’t seen any back lash, indeed people are just getting on with their lives as before.

    2. Why isn’t Alice screaming racism and sexism! How dare this poster suggest that white men don’t belong in politics. Where are the cries of outrage? Alice please defend those “old white men” with the same vigour you defend your own demographic.

      1. Fair point, Mark.

  35. You would think that Dear, as the ex-head of one of the most corrupt police forces in Britain, would have the decency to keep his mouth shut.

  36. Dream on phobie !!!

  37. JackAlison 10 May 2013, 8:29am

    kinda funny how desperate he is appealing to violence as a threat to stop the bill.
    like our friends across the channel…fridgid bardot…”blood will b spilled”

  38. GingerlyColors 10 May 2013, 9:01am

    During Labour’s years in office they equalised the age of consent at 16 using the Parliament Act ot bypass the House of Lords, scrapped Section 28, introduced laws protecting people from dismissal from their jobs for being gay, allowed gays to serve in the armed forces and introduced civil partnerships. These reforms could have easily been seen as over-zealous political correctness and could have provoked an anti-gay backlass but in the end all these turned out to be non-issues. Society as moved on since the days of criminalization and the problems we had with the arrival of HIV/AIDS and nowadays everyday people such as ourselves and not just celebrities, pop stars and actors can now declare our sexuality.
    What we want is just one more favour and that is full marriage equality and in this enlightened era I doubt that very much that people would want to turn the clock back to the days when we had to stay in the closet.

  39. Saw this French Nazi anti-gay rabble on youtube with, of course, gay Catholic priests in the thick of it. The gendarmes kicked ass including a priest’s at 7:58. LOL.

  40. Jock S. Trap 10 May 2013, 9:32am

    The backlash only comes from the complete ignorance of the religious who keep harping on about how they don’t want equality.

    Bigoted people listen to and follow bigoted words. They promote violence and backlash just to stay above the law themselves… so they can discriminate and carry on doing so.

    The buck of any ‘backlash’ is in the hands of the vile religious. If they continue to promote it they’ll believe it.

  41. Gays might not be so vilified as a result of gay marriage if the Queen openly supported the move – but, of course, she won’t.
    Wonderful example of how people in authority could do much good, but won’t.

    1. The queen is not allowed to be political.
      She can advise but nothing more.
      The last monarch who attempted to instruct parliament had to abdicate.

    2. Remember she did appoint Jeffrey John as a bishop of somewhere, but it was later rescinded by Rowan Williams.

  42. Most gay people can expect some sort of backlash wherever they go and the threat of violence is always present.
    I see it that we have been tolerated and given a few crumbs to keep us happy.
    Fortunately many of us are not content with this and that has upset the apple cart.
    A no nonsense ‘ don’t mess about with me’ attitude may need to be taken.
    Every dog has its’ day!

  43. Lie after lie, paper tiger after paper tiger, an incitement to hatred, a thinly veiled threat to make violent attacks on a LGBT people permissible, calling democratically elected members of parliament liars, deliberately trying to confuse the public that the conservative party is the only party in office when it’s a coalition between two parties. All of this from someone who was never elected into any kind of office, who is trying to thwart democracy,and who, I am sure, will deny that most of what he has written, has been dictated to him from guess where, and by guess who? The same one who was caught on camera dictating to Lord Tebbit what to say.

    1. Actually, come to think of it, he sounds more like Lord Haw Haw.

  44. Bringing the perpetrators to trial will anger them, so just have the victims sit quietly in the corner. This way we reduce the crime rate and worry about more important things like hating Gay people for refusing to add to the overpopulation problem.

  45. Well, we don’t attack heterosexual couples, do we dear?

    Instead of trying to provoke fear, ACTUALLY DO MORE TO PROTECT GAY MEN!!!

    This is the problem. Doddery fools that need to be kept away from the modern world that are corrupting the minds of the young, and turning them into people that hate.

  46. Would everybody who is in touch with Lord Dear, please advise him to watch the following recording with urgency and to consider that it is indeed true that the sky will NOT fall in.

    In fact, I suggest we all direct ALL of the Lords in the House of Old Fuddy-Duddies to watch this video! It ought to inspire them all, whether for or against equality.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 10 May 2013, 12:21pm

      Well said, Eddy! For everyone’s convenience, here’s a link to the Lords.

  47. Robert in S. Kensington 10 May 2013, 12:25pm

    Yes, Lord Dear, there will be a backlash but not against us but against people like you in the quest for an elected upper chamber. The bloody nerve of these people issuing veiled threats and fomenting fear and scare-mongering based in bigotry. He should spare us the bogus concern about homophobia, as if he were ever a champion of equality.

  48. gary Potter 10 May 2013, 1:27pm

    Nasty little old man,still he should be gone son as he is sooooooo old. Get out of politics you prat and start gardening,go and tend you big fat pansies creep.

  49. Gary Potter 10 May 2013, 1:38pm

    Listen Dear, we have been victimized since time dot. So just go away and let the Fags deal with it, you just stay up north and sup beer or COCKtails.

  50. Lord Dear, or to give him his full name, Sit Down Dear.

  51. In the US we call this “concern trolling”. What do y’all call it in the UK?

    1. “Idiocy”, I’d think.

  52. As Matthew Parris once said on the News Quiz ‘A bad winter goes through the House of Lords like a scythe’

    1. Roflmao

  53. Martin in Bromsgrove 10 May 2013, 4:01pm

    I served as an officer in West Midlands Police when Lord Dear was chief constable of that force. He was highly rated a chief officer. Sadly looks like he has gone all wobbly as he has got older and is now talking tosh.
    To suggest that a law should not be enacted as it might make those that benefit from that law the target of criminal acts is outrageous. It is the job of the police to protect everyone from criminal acts and he should be demanding that this law is enacted despite the so called alleged threat to gay people.
    I personally think that this so called backlash against gays will not occur. I do think that the dear Lord should be honest and explain his true reasons for objecting to equal marriage rather than trying to pretend his objection is simply out of a desire to protect gay people from being attacked

    1. Well said, Martin.

      Let’s have your REAL reasons, Mr. Dear.

  54. Liam the God 10 May 2013, 4:11pm

    Couldn’t that be construed as a threat? “Weeeeeeelllll, if you do this you MIGHT get a kicking, you know wot I mean?”.
    Just a thought…..

    1. Liam, there’s no construing. It’s a threat. It’s Dear’s “rivers of blood” moment.


  55. Staircase2 10 May 2013, 4:14pm

    What a bloody idiot…

    So the way to make Britain a more equal place is to make it less equal…?

    Do these people ever actually think when they get out of bed in the morning or do they just brush their teeth while repeating ‘must be stupid, must be stupid, must be stupid’…

  56. Diana Hodson 11 May 2013, 1:37pm

    As much as this article is most muddled/strange, i have a similar theory –being an out lesbian, have noticced a lot more prejudice since LGBT issues have been more in the limelight, (eg perhaps due to all publicity re. gay marriage ?)–seems to not have such a positive impact as one would’ve hoped

  57. As much as I disagree with Lord Dear on this, I must also disagree with many comments here.

    The situation in the UK is totally different compared to other countries that allow gay marriage. There was much more of a majority in favor compared to the UK at the moment. It is not like for like.

    To try and portray the UK as some sort of gay marriage accepting utopia is disingenuous.

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.