Reader comments · 17-year-old PinkNews reader to Tory MP David Burrowes: ‘I think you are very anti-gay’ · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


17-year-old PinkNews reader to Tory MP David Burrowes: ‘I think you are very anti-gay’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. What a great letter for Victoria, I hope that she gets a response and if she does, I hope that we see it on here.

    Good on you!

    1. *from Victoria*

  2. Couldn’t have been put better than that, this guy is not a jerk for voting against equality he’s also an arrogant, lying little pr**k

    1. Do you expect anything else from a Tory though?

      1. Smart comment. Have you a clue which government is trying to bring in gay marriage in the first place? That would be the conservative party. Still not convinced? Try this – the conservative party have more open gay MPs than all other parties joined together. It’s got nothing to do with his party. He’s an insecure little man who cannot get his closed minded head around the concept of homosexuality. He DOESN’T speak for the party though.

        1. The conservatives also have more homophobic anti marriage mps than any other, that was evident again when more voted against marriage for all.

          1. Just because they didn’t vote for it doesn’t make them homophobic. David Burrowes, based on what he’s said, clearly is but not everyone who voted against it is homophobic.

  3. Robert in S. Kensington 15 May 2013, 4:02pm

    Fantastic, Victoria. I hope she contacts the Lords with a copy of the letter. What a lovely young lady!

    Now let’s see if Burrowes can explain away his voting record on equality issues. I bet you that he doesn’t even support CPs even though he insists he does. They’ve become a very convenient too in this debate for MPs to conceal their seething resentment of gay people and our rights. Their resistance to CPs for heteros is evidence enough and proves they are nothing to do with equality, but just keeping us down and in our place.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 15 May 2013, 4:07pm

      a very convenient tool…as oppposed to an inconvenient tool Burrowes is, I might add.

  4. Sensible thoughts eloquently expressed Victoria.

    I don’t expect to be able to describe Burrowes’ response in the same terms.

  5. Well done Victoria
    No need for Mr Burrowes to reply – it’ll be the carbon copy pro marriage response. Something along the lines of marriage being a sacred institution, always between one man, one woman and by changing the definition to not be between one man, one woman, it will have dire consequences for the long term future of the institution and devalue it.
    Heard this so many times, but never heard anyone quantify how A would cause B. Why would marriage be so delicately pinned to the requirement of 2 opposite sex couples?

  6. I wonder if there will be a generation of young gay and lesbians in the future, who will not grow up having to experience the homophobia and hatred that the Tory party continues to throw at us? If it wasn’t Section 28, the age of consent, they have now rounded on marriage as one of the last stands in their hate-speak.

    Perhaps it’s something they could think about, when they thrown out of office.

    It is one thing to express views on here, but it is always important to share our views with those who are meant to govern us.

    Thanks Victoria.

  7. Robert in S. Kensington 15 May 2013, 5:00pm

    I would love to know TIm Loughton’s voting record, although I believe he voted for CPs.

    He has a very chequered political history. In January 2013 Loughton was involved in a political dispute involving his work as a minister in the Department of Education when he compared Education Secretary Michael Gove to ‘Young Mr Grace’ from the British sitcom Are You Being Served? Homophobic in my view. The very next day Loughton was described in a briefing from the Department of Education to The Spectator as a “lazy, incompetent narcissist obsessed only with self-promotion”. He was accused on 26 February 2013 of engaging “In a significant escalation of hostilities” by tabling “hostile parliamentary questions” to the department of Education in relation to an aide of Gove.

    John Bercow told him to leave the chamber on July 13, 2011 for bad behaviour and was severely rebuked. Burrowes seems to have become his protege. He was fawning over him during the equal marriage Committee hearings.

  8. Great letter! Very well written. It’ll be interesting to see if Burrowes has the backbone to reply to this and try and rationalise how he views himself as “not anti-gay” and “pro-marriage” despite all the evidence that shows otherwise.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 15 May 2013, 7:01pm

      If he responds, what he will do is avoid the issues she raised just as Tory MPs Edward Leigh and Craig Whittaker did when I contacted them last year, two nasty responses from two religious loons. Burrowes will dismiss Victoria’s points entirely as if they’re irrelevant. I tell you this, had he been in Parliament prior to the CP legislation, he would have voted against it. CPs have become a convenient tool for opponents to now suddenly support nine years later as a means to deflect criticism and homophobic accusations because they don’t support equal marriage. Another reason why I never supported CPs, I knew it would come to this. A temporary pacifier to shut us up and sadly, some among us have bought into it.

  9. Victoria Munro! You have written a very fine letter! Well done!

    (Your words brought two little tears to my eyes! Blush.)

  10. Midnighter 15 May 2013, 7:35pm

    Well done Victoria, I admire you greatly for your conviction and initiative. The future may well be in safe hands :P

  11. Of course she is right. I also have been using the term anti marriage rather than anti equal marriage and think we need to move on from that term and describe the coalition for marriage (oxymoron) and those bigots who announce they are pro marriage as anti marriage.

  12. Colin (London) 15 May 2013, 10:38pm

    Victoria..well done girl. To the point..

    I have to say that the next generation I just love their attitude. I have 2 gay nieces and they are out their with no apology for their lives working for equality and enjoying their lives. I so want that for all gays the world over

  13. friday jones 15 May 2013, 11:03pm

    What a bright and articulate young woman. I hope there are plenty of people like her in the “future generation.”

  14. That was beautifully put Victoria, well done. Not sure if you will get a reply but thank you for writing that letter, I could never do anything like that, am far, far too shy :(

    I also wish I could turn back the hands of time because at 17 I could never in a million years come out and be brave like you. I grew up with section 28 and all it has done is manifest hatred in people, especially in people like Burrowes. I really hope you get a response from this guy but either way he will still make a fool of himself either way.

  15. Excellent letter Victoria, well done indeed.

    I only hope you don’t get a reply from that little worm along the lines of his recent total-bollocks reply to another correspondent (“It is that kind of intolerance which encourages me to stand up on behalf of the majority of constituents who will not have the freedom to uphold a traditional view of marriage”).

  16. You did it superbly. You caught him right there with his “pro-marriage” yet truly means “pro hetro-marriage only” and of course he dropped off the following “and anti gay-marrige”. Yes, catch those stupid older men who thought who could get away with playing with words. Didn’t think you would be caught by a 17 year-old, eh? Come out and admit it, bro!

  17. Well done, Victoria!

    Exactly what I was thinking: pro-marriage means supporting everyone’s marriage. And yes anti-gay means discriminating. Just what David Burrowes is doing.

    Trying to odiously and unctuously calling yourself not anti-gay won’t wash when you are. Clearly.

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.