Does the Gay lobby have a monopoly on discrimination?

Wez

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Now who has a persecution complex? :pac:

Not a persecution complex (thanks for the sly dig there), it is a fact that my account now has a warning because people reported my posts.

I would actually say it's yourself that is suffering a persecution delusion.

jezzer

lazygal wrote: »

I think it blew apart the perception that the Garda operates as a fair, just and impartial force when it comes to many matters, but most especially road traffic offences. Considering the number of deaths on the roads in Ireland Garda whistleblowers have done a good day's work. Of course the usual cry of snitch and rat will come from the usual quarters.

I would completely disagree, garda speed traps and checks have no relevance to road deaths, they just hide behind this fact and use it as a money generating exercise. What they have done is taken away any bit of discretion a garda could use as it now could be seen as impartial.
A number of judges have come out recently and thrown out cases of speeding offences relating to the outsourced speed vans which are used to fleece motorists, none of these vans are ever in black spots.
Look at the recent farce whereby if someone is awaiting an NCT examination of their vehicle, through no fault of their own, can now be fined and given 3 penalty points, its a disgrace, i'm sorry but the cold hard fact is that this is a money getting exercise and is doing nothing to reduce the road death numbers.

AnonoBoy

Wez wrote: »

Not a persecution complex (thanks for the sly dig there), it is a fact that my account now has a warning because people reported my posts.

You can't be sure though - the mods might just be warning you because they read your posts!

I would actually say it's yourself that is suffering a persecution delusion.

Straight white guy like me? Ain't nobody persecuting me bub!

floggg

Wez wrote: »

Oh I'm sorry, you're dead right.

They know nothing about flamboyance.. They're just your regular blokes.

Those one line answers don't help people to understand your perspective, it's like the feminazi Tumblr responses. Explaining why you don't believe LBGT are more flamboyant than disabled people or travellers, would help the conversation to progress.

All you're doing is driving a wedge between people looking to know more, and those that are "victims of this curse" (as ye seem to suggest it is, since it's not a choice).

Do you really need me to explain to you why believing and relying on stereotypes is stupid?

And why not everybody within a group will fit within the stereotype of that group?

Also, there is little point trying to constructively engage with the OP here since he is blatantly using this thread to pursue an agenda rather than attempting any constructive dialogue on increasing representation of other minority groups.

You will note in that regard his refusal to engage in any discussion of that note, and even his disappointment that we raised that point rather than just joining in on his complaints about those Damn gags asking for equality.



Finally, who said anything about being a victim or a curse?

jezzer

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Yes I have.

Couple traveller lads helped my nan out loads. An old woman living on her own - they'd do odd jobs around the place for her and wouldn't ask for anything in exchange. Decent skins.

well that is good to hear, i know they are not all the same but a large element do the rest no favours

Wez

floggg wrote: »

Do you really need me to explain to you why believing and relying on stereotypes is stupid?

And why not everybody within a group will fit within the stereotype of that group?

Also, there is little point trying to constructively engage with the OP here since he is blatantly using this thread to pursue an agenda rather than attempting any constructive dialogue on increasing representation of other minority groups.

You will note in that regard his refusal to engage in any discussion of that note, and even his disappointment that we raised that point rather than just joining in on his complaints about those Damn gags asking for equality.



Finally, who said anything about being a victim or a curse?

The denial of flamboyance suggested ignorance, I just wanted to clarify where people might get the idea.

Never said they all fit into a certain stereotype, but there are characteristics that part of the group are flamboyant.

You say it's not a choice, "woe is me" etc.. What politically correct term should I use instead? I was being sarcastic talking about being a victim/cursed BTW..

When I referred to choice before, I meant the choice of marrying your SO. Not the choice of being dealt the hand of being that way inclined.

lazygal

Wez wrote: »

The denial of flamboyance suggested ignorance, I just wanted to clarify where people might get the idea.

Never said they all fit into a certain stereotype, but there are characteristics that part of the group are flamboyant.

You say it's not a choice, "woe is me" etc.. What politically correct term should I use instead? I was being sarcastic talking about being a victim/cursed BTW..

What's wrong with being flamboyant?

Grand Moff Tarkin

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Yes I have.

Couple traveller lads helped my nan out loads. An old woman living on her own - they'd do odd jobs around the place for her and wouldn't ask for anything in exchange. Decent skins.

We have a older traveller gent who drinks in our local and I mean it when I say he is a gent always willing to help out and as nice as a person could be.

Good and bad in every walk of life we all just need to stop and think about it for a few seconds.

Wez

lazygal wrote: »

What's wrong with being flamboyant?

Absolutely nothing! It was mentioned that perhaps that's part of why LGBT campaigning is so successful, but when it was denied that they are flamboyant (sorry, wasn't even denied, they were just called stupid) I felt perhaps they would like to know where people get that idea.

jezzer

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

We have a older traveller gent who drinks in our local and I mean it when I say he is a gent always willing to help out and as nice as a person could be.

Good and bad in every walk of life we all just need to stop and think about it for a few seconds.

A lot of the older travellers are more respectful than the younger ones who post on youtube calling each other out

Slot Machine

Wez wrote: »

Not a persecution complex (thanks for the sly dig there), it is a fact that my account now has a warning because people reported my posts.

Because you brought up a mod action on the thread, which is against the site rules. Doesn't matter what the subject matter is or where you do it, if you bring it up mod actions in a thread you'll be carded because it derails the topic.

Wez

Slot Machine wrote: »

Because you brought up a mod action on the thread, which is against the site rules. Doesn't matter what the subject matter is or where you do it, if you bring it up mod actions in a thread you'll be carded because it derails the topic.

Ah, okay. Gotcha!

To be clear, I was responding to those still asking me questions relating to a topic we were told not to discuss when it happened.

floggg

jezzer wrote: »

I would completely disagree, garda speed traps and checks have no relevance to road deaths.

Really?

Are you saying that speeding doesn't cause Road deaths or that speed traps and cameras don't reduce speeding?

I know the former is definitely BS, and would be very surprised if the latter wasn't as well.

jezzer

floggg wrote: »

Really?

Are you saying that speeding doesn't cause Road deaths or that speed traps and cameras don't reduce speeding?

I know the former is definitely BS, and would be very surprised if the latter wasn't as well.

What i am saying is that speed traps and cameras do not reduce speeding in places where accidents occur and you cannot argue with that, look at where they are positioned on straight parts of the road no where near black sport, of course speeding causes road deaths, dont be stupid

floggg

jezzer wrote: »

What i am saying is that speed traps and cameras do not reduce speeding in places where accidents occur and you cannot argue with that, look at where they are positioned on straight parts of the road no where near black sport, of course speeding causes road deaths, dont be stupid

Should we stick them on bends?

Even if they don't directly target the black spots, I think they definitely have an effect. If all they do is force people to be more conscious of their speed at times, that has a huge impact by creating a culture of awareness on the issue.

And sure what harm are they. If you aren't speeding, they don't cost you a thing.

If you are spending and get caught, then I am delighted for you and hopefully with enough tickets or plenty points you'll either change your was or be put off the road.

GLaDOS

Speed trap discussion is not relevant to the topic folks, keep discussion to the topic at hand

gormdubhgorm

cloudatlas wrote: »

It pisses me off that you are playing other minority groups off each other that's not the point and it's a reductive argument, instead of asking why panti and not others you should be asking why give panti an award at all and look into some of the history and background that has lead to us having a referendum. It's not just shouting abuse at someone at traffic lights it's far more insidious and ingrained in society than that in the work place, schools, in the street, in the media. I get bored of the lazy 'why do they have to go on about being gay so much' well then change the channel, turn the page but the fact is that straight life is so ingrained and accepted that you don't bat an eye lid when that is mentioned in any shape or form. That speech was very powerful and got 675,097 views on youtube so clearly some people are interested and some people do want things to change and that should be praised.

If you know of anyone in any other community that you thinks deserved the award then I would invite you to name them on this thread.

"straight life is so ingrained and accepted that you don't bat an eye lid when that is mentioned" People do bat an eyelid when it comes to the other minority groups that I mentioned.

I am not against the fact that a gay person got an award. What I am amazed at is that he seemed to get it mainly because of an impassioned speech. The speech was mainly about a person who got abuse because they are different to others. It does not seem like much of a reason to get an award to me.

Yet, as you pointed out this speech got 675,097 views on you tube and resulted in this award. It seemed like a very ordinary albeit passionate speech in my opinion. But yet it managed to get lots of attention.

I just feel that other groups could learn from this approach as the gay community seem to be very good at self promotion and advocacy issues and other minority groups are not as good at it at all.

Daith

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

The speech was mainly about a person who got abuse because they are different to others. It does not seem like much of a reason to get an award to me.

You might think differently if you've ever held your partners hand in the middle of Dublin and are called a fag or bum boys.

Do you meekly accept their abuse and carry on as if nothing happened?

gormdubhgorm

Daith wrote: »

You might think differently if you've ever held your partners hand in the middle of Dublin and are called a fag or bum boys.

Do you meekly accept their abuse and carry on as if nothing happened?

That depends on the individual whether a gay person, a traveller, disabled person or a person of an ethnic minority got abuse they also could react in a number of ways. Depending upon their personality and the situation.

But it is hardly a thing that deserves an award? It happens to people who are different to others all the time. The phrase "Do you want a medal for it?" comes to mind.

If it was a particular achievement or someone who broke new boundaries for those within their particular group that would be different.

In the incident that panti bliss mentioned he was in plain clothes as Rory standing at a traffic light and got abused it sounds like nothing out of the ordinary other minority groups would receive.

The reason I started the thread was I was shocked at the amount of attention this received. Then this had me thinking about how the other minority groups do not receive the same amount of mainstream attention and what were the reasons?

Daith

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But it is hardly a thing that deserves an award? It happens to people who are different to others all the time. The phrase "Do you want a medal for it?" comes to mind.

So just because it happens to other people all the time you should roll over and accept it? If a disabled person got a person of the year award would you be complaining?

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

The reason I started the thread was I was shocked at the amount of attention this received. Then this had me thinking about how the other minority groups do not receive the same amount of mainstream attention and what were the reasons?

There were other factors like the Iona Institute suing and RTE paying €85,000 to various people.

The real reason is that Rory O'Neill is an intelligent person and was able to turn being sued from six different people into something else and he took advantage of it.

gormdubhgorm

Daith wrote: »

So just because it happens to other people all the time you should roll over and accept it? If a disabled person got a person of the year award would you be complaining?



There were other factors like the Iona Institute suing and RTE paying €85,000 to various people.

The real reason is that Rory O'Neill is an intelligent person and was able to turn being sued from six different people into something else and he took advantage of it.

You have made very good points. If a disabled person/or an other minority group got an award and broke some kind of boundaries even within their own particular group I would have no problem with it.

But for someone from any group to get award for been called hurtful names is more then a bit silly.

Your point about the Iona institute episode is a very good one which I had not considered.

Daith

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But for someone from any group to get award for been called hurtful names is more then a bit silly.

Well that wasn't the reason he got the award so we all good yeah? Panti's speech was about homophobia and being called names was one part of it. In fact his speech was only one part of why he got the award.

Again though if you're on the street and you're called a fag or bum boy and just thought it was fine and silly and you accept it fair enough.

I presume you're ok with every other winner of the awards?

jezzer

I think the whole gay thing is getting out of hand, its funny really they say they want to basically fit in yet they stand out so much, i think the best thing for all concerned is for everybody to just go about their own business and pass no remarks and all the hype will die down and everyone will be the better for it

lazygal

jezzer wrote: »

I think the whole gay thing is getting out of hand, its funny really they say they want to basically fit in yet they stand out so much, i think the best thing for all concerned is for everybody to just go about their own business and pass no remarks and all the hype will die down and everyone will be the better for it

Who are 'they'? Do you mean every single gay person ever wants to stand out? That can't be possible. Not every gay person is a drag queen or an attention seeker. Is Katherine Zappone standing out for the sake of it in the Seanad?

DeVore

jezzer wrote: »

I think the whole gay thing is getting out of hand, its funny really they say they want to basically fit in yet they stand out so much, i think the best thing for all concerned is for everybody to just go about their own business and pass no remarks and all the hype will die down and everyone will be the better for it

How are you identifying the gay people who DON'T stand out .... if you aren't, how are you determining the % of the whole gay community who do?


Serious question...

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

I think the whole gay thing is getting out of hand, its funny really they say they want to basically fit in yet they stand out so much, i think the best thing for all concerned is for everybody to just go about their own business and pass no remarks and all the hype will die down and everyone will be the better for it

You know, that would be absolutely wonderful. If two gay men could walk down the road holding hands without receiving verbal abuse then we would all better off for it. Unfortunately that isnt the case so people like Rory will continue to speak out about it and, god forbid, receive awards for doing so. And in a fabulous dress to boot.

gormdubhgorm

Daith wrote: »

Well that wasn't the reason he got the award so we all good yeah? Panti's speech was about homophobia and being called names was one part of it. In fact his speech was only one part of why he got the award.

Again though if you're on the street and you're called a fag or bum boy and just thought it was fine and silly and you accept it fair enough.

I presume you're ok with every other winner of the awards?

Well if he did some good in his community he deserved the award. But the impression I got was it was very tenuous admittedly I did only see a bit of that section and did not see the other award winners.

I never said it ok to be called a fag or bum boy. My point was people who are different and called minority groups are regularly called names too. But it does not mean that the victims of abuse deserve awards for it.

David Norris made heavy emphasis of the name calling aspect.

If the the guy deserved the award and it was of benefit to his community fair dues. But otherwise I do not see why the speech deserved an award.

GLaDOS

I've just deleted a load of posts for the very thing that was warned was off topic

No more off topic posts on speed traps

Beano

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Well if he did some good in his community he deserved the award. But the impression I got was it was very tenuous admittedly I did only see a bit of that section and did not see the...

well then you need to pay more attention. His speech achieved worldwide acclaim. Every time that somebody stands up and says such behaviour is not acceptable it helps everybody who receives such abuse.

Daith

Beano wrote: »

You know, that would be absolutely wonderful. If two gay men could walk down the road holding hands without receiving verbal abuse then we would all better off for it. Unfortunately that isnt the case so people like Rory will continue to speak out about it and, god forbid, receive awards for doing so. And in a fabulous dress to boot.

I absolutely love the fact that Iona and John Waters small time victory against RTE has now led to a drag queen getting a person of the year award.

I honestly can't wait in 10 years time to watch Reeling in the Years 2014.

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But it does not mean that the victims of abuse deserve awards for it..

Ok so!

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But the impression I got was it was very tenuous admittedly I did only see a bit of that section and did not see the other award winners.

So you didn't watch the full show, but just felt outraged that some gay person got an award for being called names, then created a topic about it complaining that gays were getting awards and other groups weren't and you couldn't even be bothered watching the full show?

So if you are concerned that much about other groups, why did you just watch the part about the drag queen?

Ash.J.Williams

I'm not a bigot homophobe and i learned a lot from Panti's speech too. Not just about sexuality but how my words and actions affect others....

gormdubhgorm

Daith wrote: »

So you didn't watch the full show, but just felt outraged that some gay person got an award for being called names, then created a topic about it complaining that gays were getting awards and other groups weren't and you couldn't even be bothered watching the full show?

So if you are concerned that much about other groups, why did you just watch the part about the drag queen?

It was not the fact that the person was gay that was an irrelevance. It was the fact the main tenet of it seemed to be that x person was demeaned by mainstream society ergo deserves an award.

I was not complaining how a gay person got the award others should have got the award. I was struck by the amount of fuss that was made and how much attention it seemed to get. Then Fry and Norris added their bit too. It just seemed very tenuous to me to get so much attention. Just my opinion.

As for not even bothering to watch the full show I was walking around the house at the time as someone else was watching it.

But you yourself have stated:

Daith wrote: »

I absolutely love the fact that Iona and John Waters small time victory against RTE has now led to a drag queen getting a person of the year award.

I honestly can't wait in 10 years time to watch Reeling in the Year 2014

So perhaps this is the real reason why the award was given rather then any actual achievement to get an award in the first place?.

Beano

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

<inappropriate comment snipped>

oh dear :rolleyes:

Annasopra

jezzer wrote: »

I think the whole gay thing is getting out of hand, its funny really they say they want to basically fit in yet they stand out so much, i think the best thing for all concerned is for everybody to just go about their own business and pass no remarks and all the hype will die down and everyone will be the better for it

I agree. We should enforce a ban on all hetereosxuality pdas and heterosexuality being flaunted in our faces every day.

Beano

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I agree. We should enforce a ban on all hetereosxuality pdas and heterosexuality being flaunted in our faces every day.

here here. i find it quite sickening.

jezzer

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I agree. We should enforce a ban on all hetereosxuality pdas and heterosexuality being flaunted in our faces every day.

well said, this hetro stuff is everywhere, its just so wrong

gormdubhgorm

Originally Posted by jezzer
I think the whole gay thing is getting out of hand, its funny really they say they want to basically fit in yet they stand out so much, i think the best thing for all concerned is for everybody to just go about their own business and pass no remarks and all the hype will die down and everyone will be the better for it

In fairness that Rory guy was not in his panti bliss armour. He was dressed like a civilian, yet got verbally abused at traffic lights.

jezzer

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

In fairness that Rory guy was not in his panti bliss armour. He was dressed like a civilian, yet got verbally abused at traffic lights.

Ah yea, well thats not on but not sure of the point of your post?

gormdubhgorm

jezzer wrote: »

Ah yea, well thats not on but not sure of the point of your post?

In other words he was not "standing out" but still got verbally abused.

jezzer

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

In other words he was not "standing out" but still got verbally abused.

it was wrong and i'm not defending it or anything but it was probably because he had previously stood out, but of course it was wrong

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

it was wrong and i'm not defending it or anything but it was probably because he had previously stood out, but of course it was wrong

no you're not defending it. But you are blaming him for standing out.

floggg

Wez wrote: »

Absolutely nothing! It was mentioned that perhaps that's part of why LGBT campaigning is so successful, but when it was denied that they are flamboyant (sorry, wasn't even denied, they were just called stupid) I felt perhaps they would like to know where people get that idea.

And which is another reason for the stupidity of the post. Do you really think anybody went "I'm not too sure about gay marriage, but that Graham Norton guy wears some pretty flamboyant shirts so it must be ok".

There are many reasons why lgbt rights issues have made progress in recent years, and I'd be happy to discuss them in another thread.

This thread however is a blatant effort by the OP to have some sort of dig, so there is little point in trying to engage with him.

AnonoBoy

Bald people should wear hats so they're not flaunting their baldness in public.

I know a bald guy who got abuse in public once. He was wearing a hat at the time but had previously been hatless so he invited it on himself I think.

DeVore

jezzer wrote: »

I think the whole gay thing is getting out of hand, its funny really they say they want to basically fit in yet they stand out so much, i think the best thing for all concerned is for everybody to just go about their own business and pass no remarks and all the hype will die down and everyone will be the better for it

How are you identifying the gay people who DON'T stand out .... if you aren't, how are you determining the % of the whole gay community who do?


Serious question...

Perhaps you missed my question

jezzer

Beano wrote: »

no you're not defending it. But you are blaming him for standing out.

I'm not blaming him for anything but i think its best for society if everyone keeps to themselves

efb

jezzer wrote: »

I'm not blaming him for anything but i think its best for society if everyone keeps to themselves

Let's all wear grey jumpsuits so no one stands out

jezzer

efb wrote: »

Let's all wear grey jumpsuits so no one stands out

yes

efb

jezzer wrote: »

yes

Best die our hair and wear contacts to change eye colour to all the same.

What do we do about height and weight?

AnonoBoy

jezzer wrote: »

I'm not blaming him for anything but i think its best for society if everyone keeps to themselves

Keeps to themselves?

Attention humans.

Stay indoors.

Do not attempt social contact.

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

I'm not blaming him for anything but i think its best for society if everyone keeps to themselves

blaming him is exactly what you are doing. if he hadnt brought attention to himself then he wouldnt have been abused. That is what you are saying, right?