Brenda Power in the Sunday Times

Goodshape

So this is the sort of misguided opinion we're up against :
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article6637267.ece

Nasty article. Can't deny it raises a few worthwhile points though.

This is someone who has seen the media coverage of drag queens and over-the-top gays during the annual Pride celebrations, put two and two together and has came to conclusion that it's an accurate portrayal of the day to day life of the homosexual community (=5).

Brenda Power, Sunday Times wrote:

Homosexuals insist that their nature is an inherent, essential reality, and not a lifestyle choice. But if we were to judge by the get-up and carry-on of some of those in the Pride march last week, that’s hard to believe. Some are definitely choosing to pursue a way of life that is quite alien to the majority of married heterosexual parents in this country, indeed deliberately and defiantly so.

Brenda Power, Sunday Times wrote:

It’s a bit rich, though, to thumb your nose at traditional rituals and values and then demand that the most traditional of all — marriage — be reinvented and adapted just to suit you.

Now, on the one hand, Ms. Power seems to have lived quite a sheltered life if she thinks OTT celebrations are limited only to the gay community... ever been to a rave? Rio Carnival, anyone? (<-- Google Images link.. probably NOT safe for work!)... but I guess so long as it's not a couple of guys, or a couple of woman, then all is well?


On the other hand... I do think this highlights the need for a more balanced, more respectful, representative for the gay community when it comes to fighting for our rights. While I'm personally able to differentiate between a pride parade and a political discourse -- it seems there are many in the straight community who are not.

At the end of the day, making political points in drag is like turning up to a business meeting in full skater gear. It's never really going to work. So what else have we got? Is Miss Panti really the best we have in terms of community leadership? Is fun and games more important that a serious push for equal rights?


And before anyone has a go -- I recognise the importance of the pride celebrations for the gay community. It's the lack of any other form of representation that I see as the problem.

LegacyUser

Pride is more than a political statement. It's also a party/celebration, and just like in the St Pat's Parade, people dress up and have fun. The word "parade" should have been a clue Branda! It's an event for the gay community, more than it is for the wider community's benefit. And that's to ignore the fact that how a person dresses or expresses themselves should have no baring on what they have to say, or whether they should be afforded the same rights as anyone else.

You find a very different scene at gay rights political rallies. Indeed, at the last rally for civil marriage, Rory O'Neill (aka Panti) spoke - in a shirt and trousers! Would Brenda have listened to him then? Of course not because bigots like her don't listen. She's only interested when she can use silly side-swipes at how people dress at a parade to distract for her illinformed, ignorant opinions.

Iskenderun

I wonder if Brenda Power has ever been to a stag or hen party?
Same difference!

LookingFor

Most of the people at pride are pretty regular looking people.

The media always focusses on the more outrageous looking folks.

That's possibly the lens she was viewing pride through.

It's not fair to lump everyone in with those who choose - yes, choose - to express themselves very flamboyantly.

To blur the line between that kind of expression and homosexuality itself is very disingenuous and irresponsible, however.

I would say, also, that Dublin pride isn't nearly as bad as pride in other cities as far as outrageous expression goes. Some places, bedroom sexuality is brought right out onto the street for pride. So it could be worse. Dublin is not so bad. There's a healthy dose of 'respectability' at pride here too via the particpating political parties and a number of high profile politicians who attended.

I do think gay people have an image problem with certain people, though, like Power..but pride organisers can't really ask photogs and the like to take pictures of the 'ordinary' people if they insist on focussing on the handful of folks in drag or whatever. It's really also very unfair to suggest that because some small minority of gay people dress themselves in women's clothes that the notion of conservatism or 'trappings' of certain institutions like marriage should be witheld from them from in general. And if that were the case, there'd be many straight people locked out of such 'traditions' based on their behaviour too! I dunno..it smacks of knowingly exploiting an image a certain type of person out there has of gay people (i.e. those whose exposure to gay people is solely through that drag queen photo the Irish Times throws out every year the day after pride).

I also really dislike the point about "gay people have the same marriage rights everyone has. they can marry a member of the opposite sex just like the rest of us!". This point is ALWAYS a red flag for me when it comes to any debater on the matter. It's akin to saying that a person in a wheelchair has the same accessibility to a building with a flight of steps to its entrance as everyone else, if only they could walk.

Goodshape

LookingFor wrote: »

It's not fair to lump everyone in with those who choose - yes, choose - to express themselves very flamboyantly.

And often for only one day a year - or at least only on occasion.

To blur the line between that kind of expression and homosexuality itself is very disingenuous and irresponsible, however.

I totally agree. I think it's clear (particularly to the audience on this forum) that Power's article is a simply dreadful piece of journalism, or at least a woefully misinformed opinion piece.

I guess I'm just lamenting the fact that there's little else for the wider population to see. Once a year the queens pour out of the clubs and onto the street for a high-camp march, and this is the most visible expression of the gay community they're likely to see.

That would be fine if there were another side to things but I don't see that there is. I was speaking with my flatmate recently about gay nightclubs -- a perfectly open minded (straight) guy and one of my best friends for the past 10 years -- and he had honestly assumed that drag, feathers, high camp and promiscuity were the norm in the average gay venue. He'd certainly never been to one himself.

But I don't know, what do people here think? I'm admittedly a bit of a boring type when it comes to a night out -- prefer a few pints around a table with friends to any type of nightclub -- are people generally happy with the public perception of the 'gay community' ?

Is the aim to have this 'multi-colour' lifestyle become acceptable and respected in society? Or should we, as a community, be making more of an attempt to highlight the 'normal' gays. The one's you wouldn't necessarily be able to pick out of a line-up.

It's akin to saying that a person in a wheelchair has the same accessibility to a building with a flight of steps to its entrance as everyone else, if only they could walk.

Very good

4red

Brenda Power is a noted bigot and homophobe in her role as a 'journalist' for the Sunday Times and other publications.

I suggest you take her openly prejudiced anti-gay ramblings for being just that.

Her day is past, and even the conservative Sunday Times won't hold onto her for very much longer.

Ireland is moving forward - without the likes of Brenda Power.

DubArk

4red wrote: »

Brenda Power is a noted bigot and homophobe in her role as a 'journalist' for the Sunday Times and other publications.

I suggest you take her openly prejudiced anti-gay ramblings for being just that.

Her day is past, and even the conservative Sunday Times won't hold onto her for very much longer.

Ireland is moving forward - without the likes of Brenda Power.

Quite right! Brenda is the last of dinosaurs; it’s obvious to all who’ve read her outdated and some what childlike opinions on same sex couples that poor old Brenda hasn’t really got out much from her little heterosexual bubble.

She has a right to her view and the more Brendas that are out there the easier it will be for us to win our argument.

Rock on Brenda… you’re a god send!

shoegirl

Dublin pride is pretty mild compared to what I've seen in other countries.

Actually a lot of the dressing up actually disguises guys who might not want to go back and talk to the guys on the building site about their sexuality!!

Aoifums

This actually makes me feel awful

It is simply unfair to suggest taking a child, presumably conceived by a heterosexual couple, and placing them in an entirely different dynamic and in a family unit that makes them different from the start. That’s not about insulting or undermining homosexual partners; it’s about prioritising the rights of the child.

If only there weren't so many unwanted and orphaned children. She makes it sound like people are plucking children from their bio parents just to make a couple happy.

Goodshape

Panti has a piece on her blog about it : http://www.pantibar.com/blog.aspx?contentid=2797

Hopefully she'll find the time to write, and can get published, a proper response as one of the commentators suggests. That would make some worthwhile reading.


Seems Brenda is a fairly well known bigot anyway. Here's hoping I was making an issue out of mostly nothing with my OP.

Snoogans

Pride marches are the greatest threat to acceptance of the gay community.
Obviously the media will fixate on the more flamboyant people in these situations, what would you expect?
While getting a woman to straddle the barrell of a pink tank and driving it around is brilliant for raising actualy awareness of the gay community, it doesn't exactly present an image of someone who wants (deserves?) to be taken seriously. When the majority of homosexual or bisexual people in the media are so goddamn flamboyantly gay, and/or are defined by their sexuality, you realise that, in spite of all the progress that's been made, there's a long way to go.

anoisaris

Snoogans wrote: »

Pride marches are the greatest threat to acceptance of the gay community.

No, I would think bigots are!

Have you attended a pride march to make such a comment? Anyone that thinks that of the 12,000 marching through Dublin were surely not there themselves. Brenda Power fairly clearly wasn't in attendance either! If the media portrays it as all being men in dresses well then the media portrayal is very wrong.

Snoogans

anoisaris wrote: »

No, I would think bigots are!

Have you attended a pride march to make such a comment? Anyone that thinks that of the 12,000 marching through Dublin were surely not there themselves. Brenda Power fairly clearly wasn't in attendance either! If the media portrays it as all being men in dresses well then the media portrayal is very wrong.

My point is that when there are men in dresses, the media will fixate on them. And I don't blame them... well not much anyway. They'll always fixate on the most attention grabbing people. Those very deliberately camping it up are doing everyone else a disservice. Why do we even need to march through the streets because of our sexuality?
And to answer your question no, I've never been to a pride march, though I've been to some "pride parties" at college. I'm pretty deeply in the closet (due to my environment, unfortunately)

Goodshape

Snoogans wrote: »

Pride marches are the greatest threat to acceptance of the gay community.

Eehhh, I'm not so sure. Getting rid of the Pride celebrations altogether sounds like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to me, and that's not what I was trying to suggest. In anycase, there's another thread here if you want to complain about the relevance of the Pride celebrations.

What I see as being important is that the Pride march, and other 'celebrations'/'protests' of that style, don't become the only outlet we have. Fun and games are great... a display of unity within a diverse community is great... but a man in a dress is still too easily dismissed by most people. Any political message is bound to be lost.


Something else Panti posted on her blog today -- a re-post of a letter written by the mother of a gay son to Minister Ahern. It's a beautiful letter and sure to bring a tear to many an eyebrow. I think we should be looking to foster more of this type of support from our friends, family and loved ones -- show them that it's not just the drag artists who are concerned about equal rights for the gays.

After that, I don't see any problem in us all getting together for a street party once a year . One need only turn up to the event to realise the fun far out-weighs the seedy.

Snoogans

Pride Marches as they are move us backwards rather than forwards I think. I mean why do you, or anyone else feel they have to march around to declare their sexuality. It's 2009, and I#'m prety sure the world knows gay people exist. We should be going to lengths to illustrate the fact that we're the same as anyone else, not trying to appear different.

anoisaris

Pride is a party above anything at this stage (albeit with political foundations) if people want to dress up-let them! If the media focus on the minority dressed up then yes that is a problem and unbalanced reporting.

Yeah it may be 2009 but many gay (especially younger or non-scene ones-see other posts here) and straight people probably didn't realise there was even 12,000 gay people in this country

Goodshape

Snoogans wrote: »

Pride Marches as they are move us backwards rather than forwards I think. I mean why do you, or anyone else feel they have to march around to declare their sexuality. It's 2009, and I#'m prety sure the world knows gay people exist. We should be going to lengths to illustrate the fact that we're the same as anyone else, not trying to appear different.

In my view the Pride Marches are for the gay community.. which is really my whole point. They shouldn't be seen as our chance for a political soap-box.

It's about showing those who might not be so sure about themselves that yes, there are loads of us, yes you can be as different and wonderful as you want, and yes there's a place for you here among friends. That's still important, even in 2009.

What I think might be lacking is something in addition to Pride. Turning up once a year for the parade and then disappearing back into our little designated gay zones just doesn't cut it. For whatever reason, people like Brenda Power (total bigot) and my flatmate (really nice open minded guy) have this drag and feathers image of the 'gay lifestyle'. Surely we can do something during the other 51 weeks in the year to show them that it's not the case.

And leave pride where it is. It's still important, just for entirely different reasons.

Snoogans

Goodshape wrote: »

In my view the Pride Marches are for the gay community.. which is really my whole point. They shouldn't be seen as our chance for a political soap-box.

It's about showing those who might not be so sure about themselves that yes, there are loads of us, yes you can be as different and wonderful as you want, and yes there's a place for you here among friends. That's still important, even in 2009.

I think that's a great sentiment, and one that should probably be echoed throughout our society, not just to gay people. I honestly hadn't looked at it that way before. I mean, I still have issues with simeltaneously wearing drag and peacock feathers, marching through the streets, and then being asked not to be stereotyped or complaining when not taken seriously, but I am seeing things another way too.

What I think might be lacking is something in addition to Pride. Turning up once a year for the parade and then disappearing back into our little designated gay zones just doesn't cut it. For whatever reason, people like Brenda Power (total bigot) and my flatmate (really nice open minded guy) have this drag and feathers image of the 'gay lifestyle'. Surely we can do something during the other 51 weeks in the year to show them that it's not the case.

And leave pride where it is. It's still important, just for entirely different reasons.

I think Pride wouldn't be as damaging in the way I think it is if we did do something different the other 51 weeks of the year, as you've suggested. Something just to let people know that not all gay people wear feathers and drag, we don't fancy every member of the same sex, and we're not all so flamboyantly camp we make people's houses catch on fire. How to go about that is more interesting.

anoisaris

August 9th!!! It won't be all feathers and drag and it will be political....

LookingFor

As much as pride has evolved to be a 'party' to a large degree..it absolutely does have a political element. It's roots were very political. And pride did have a pretty heavy political slant to it this year I think.

Aard

Snoogans wrote: »

I think Pride wouldn't be as damaging in the way I think it is if we did do something different the other 51 weeks of the year, as you've suggested. Something just to let people know that not all gay people wear feathers and drag, we don't fancy every member of the same sex, and we're not all so flamboyantly camp we make people's houses catch on fire. How to go about that is more interesting.

I think to start with, we should remove the political element from Pride. The message of "Equal rights for all", coupled with drag costumes and campness creates a dischord in many people's heads (not just straight people, mind). If Pride were marketed as more of a "family day out" (yes, I know, it would need radical remodelling) then I think the message of peace and harmony would be better carried.


Then, once that's de-politicised, we can have another entirely seperate rally for LGBT Rights, where the non-scene gays can come out of the woodwork without being associated with feathers and pink. For this we could campaign for the issues of marriage, adoption, recognition of transgendered people &c. This mightn't be in the form of a parade, but a rally in a large public area.


Atm, I don't attend Pride at all. However, were the above systems in place, I'd attend both. I'm sure many others are like me. It allows them to participate in the latter without being all "we're here, we're queer", and allows more people to participate in the former due to it's being just pure clean fun. It would boost visibility of the gay population (I don't say community) exponentially. And it would keep the roots of Pride alive by still having a political aspect.


What d'yous think?

anoisaris

The rally for rights (well one right at least-marriage!) you speak of is on August 9th in Dublin. it doesn't seem to be advertised much just yet but I'm sure it will be soon.

jimminy-boi

I've written a response to Brenda's letter over on my blog (http://conorpendergrast.wordpress.com/2009/07/07/open-letter-to-brenda-power/) but her Sunday Times e-mail address bounces, if anyone has it could they e-mail it to me: conorpendergrast [at] gmail [dot] com? Or Twitter: @conorp

Regards,

Conor P

Snoogans

Aard wrote: »

I think to start with, we should remove the political element from Pride. The message of "Equal rights for all", coupled with drag costumes and campness creates a dischord in many people's heads (not just straight people, mind). If Pride were marketed as more of a "family day out" (yes, I know, it would need radical remodelling) then I think the message of peace and harmony would be better carried.


Then, once that's de-politicised, we can have another entirely seperate rally for LGBT Rights, where the non-scene gays can come out of the woodwork without being associated with feathers and pink. For this we could campaign for the issues of marriage, adoption, recognition of transgendered people &c. This mightn't be in the form of a parade, but a rally in a large public area.


Atm, I don't attend Pride at all. However, were the above systems in place, I'd attend both. I'm sure many others are like me. It allows them to participate in the latter without being all "we're here, we're queer", and allows more people to participate in the former due to it's being just pure clean fun. It would boost visibility of the gay population (I don't say community) exponentially. And it would keep the roots of Pride alive by still having a political aspect.


What d'yous think?

I thought I was the only one that seemed to have issues with the current incarnation.

LookingFor

jimminy-boi wrote: »

I've written a response to Brenda's letter over on my blog (http://conorpendergrast.wordpress.com/2009/07/07/open-letter-to-brenda-power/) but her Sunday Times e-mail address bounces, if anyone has it could they e-mail it to me: conorpendergrast [at] gmail [dot] com? Or Twitter: @conorp

Regards,

Conor P

I intended on sending her a mail too..I ended up sending it to the online editor (online.editor@timesonline.co.uk), asking him/her to redirect it.

Now I hear she's basically the equivalent of a message board troll, I'm not sure if I should have bothered

edit - oops, I see you sent it to the editor already from your blog post.

common_parlance

I used to have doubts about Pride. Seeing as sexuality is an inherent quality and not something we decide for ourselves, I always wondered "what's there to be proud about?" I'm not "proud" of being a man, or white, or blue-eyed or anything else I didn't decide or achieve for myself.

But having attended this year I realise the importance of Pride. There is no "male community" - there are too many men with so little in common that they share no interests or goals. White people are too widespread and culturally diverse to ever come together as a community. Straight people are not unified and have no need to be. But the LGBTQ population, by virtue of its minority and the common challenges it faces does make for a community with its own culture. And I'm proud of that community, and that is the point of Pride.

Pride is a celebration. We cheer our community and our culture. And yes, it's a culture that includes flamboyance, fun and colour. I think the LGBT community is a community that has the confidence to enjoy itself and make fun of itself in front of all the Brenda Powers out there spreading their fallacies, misrepresentations and petty snipes.

As such comings-together of the LGBTQ community are rare, I think it is important for us to talk politics. But I agree that the real campaigning should be done outside Pride. Brenda wants serious? Then let's show her serious. See you on August 9th!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QJpW_16ch8

LegacyUser

DubArk wrote: »

Quite right! Brenda is the last of dinosaurs; it’s obvious to all who’ve read her outdated and some what childlike opinions on same sex couples that poor old Brenda hasn’t really got out much from her little heterosexual bubble.

She has a right to her view and the more Brendas that are out there the easier it will be for us to win our argument.

Rock on Brenda… you’re a god send!

Are you for real? You actually think that woman deserves even an inch on a national newspaper, I for one utterly ashamed that people like her still exist in modern ireland,I thought ireland was no longer a puppet for the church and how wrong I was. Equality is Equality no if ands or buts, I suggest reading the Article on Human Rights. When are people going to understand what being treated equal is. Homosexuals want no or no less than to be treated the same as our brothers and sisters.

solice

Just a quick question - how many LGB people dont go to pride and why dont they go?

Im not talking about people who are out in the schticks of the Dingle Peninsula who just cant make it, im talking about the LGB people who choose not to go because pride doesnt really represent them. There are 4.3 million people in this country, there is an estimated 430,000 homosexuals, 120,000 (if not more) in Dublin. Why did only 12,000 turn up to the national celebration of their sexuality?

I have been to pride in a number of countries and I have seen some amazing parades and political statements being made, and political people looking to make statments! but I have to say that I am affected by all the other aspects of the so called pride. Call it internalised homophobia, call it being uptight or a prude but pride today doesnt represent me or who I am. And I can see Brenda Powers point on this, people dressing up and acting they way they do on the day is not going to win any favours from the establishment and will not further the cause of the LGB movement.

The theme of pride was equality, I dont think anyone watching from the sidelines would have known that?

Originally pride was a rebellion, it was a struggle so that we could be considered normal, that our love wasnt an illegal activity, to be treated the same. Now it is a celebration of "being different".

I think that Pride needs to go back to its roots and hopefully this march in August will be that.

Brenda is entitled to her point of view, however skewed and wrong she is, if you want to flaunt your differences in her face, she is entitled to write about it.

Annasopra

Saw this on Facebook

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/group.php?gid=95636382876

MATT COOPERS THE LAST WORD ON TODAY FM TOMORROW 08/07 AT 6PM

Hi Guys,

I got a reply from Matt's Cooper Reasearch team, any of you interested in sharing your opinion please contact them. IT'S YOUR CHANCE TO TAKE PART !!!!!!!!!!!
I know that many of you (including myself) are not very pleased with the article by Brenda Power, please make valid points and stay professional about the subject.

They are hoping to speak to Brenda at about 6pm tomorrow on the program.

E-MAIL: MCarroll@todayfm.com Mary Carroll
Researcher The Last Word Today Fm

TEL: 00353 (0)1 8049023

m-i-t-s-u-k-o

solice wrote: »

Brenda is entitled to her point of view, however skewed and wrong she is, if you want to flaunt your differences in her face, she is entitled to write about it.

That may be but she has made a lot of wild assertions in that article and claimed them as fact.

Anyone just hear her on the radio?

Questions asked to her: Criminals can get married. Homosexuals can't even though homosexuality was decriminalised. Why is this?

Her response: Well children can't get married! Why's that? That's discrimination! That's a stupid argument and a stupid comparison.


One thing that confuses me about Ms Power's arguement is that she talks about how the Gay community go against social traditions with their life style but still they want to opt into the oldest social tradition of marriage.

My question is that since when is tradition always right or always good?
Since when is it such a bad thing to bring about change?

She talked about how traditionally two parents of two genders brought up a child and that must be better because it's tradition. Lies. It's only tradition because homosexuality has only recently become a social norm.

LookingFor

I didn't hear the segment..but I really, really hope someone pulled her up on the "'beyond the pale' social expression/behaviour as why gays are not worthy of traditions" logic, and how the same logic can be applied to straight people, or anyone (see: dublin on a saturday night).

I'm not sure I've much hope her logic was devoured if she was given openings to get in such stupidities as a comparison to marriage between children though..people just need to stop giving people like this a platform. They're knowingly provocative, provocation lines their pockets.