Same Sex Marriage Referendum Mega Thread Part 2

marmurr1916

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I think you missed Floggg's point which is that as a gay man he had to go and ask people to grant him access to something that would have been automatic if he was straight. That was humiliating. As a lesbian I agree.

What makes you think that it would have been automatic if he was straight? Straight people of differing races were denied the right to legally marry in many parts of the USA and other parts of the world, including South Africa, for centuries.

To this day there is no legal civil marriage in Israel. So if a straight couple, one of whom is Muslim, the other of whom is Jewish, wish to marry they have to either go abroad to do so or they have to find a rabbi/imam who would be willing to perform the ceremony.

I doubt very much that a straight Christian could legally marry a straight Muslim in Saudi Arabia without first converting to Islam.

The chances of a lower-caste Hindu woman marrying a Buddhist in India are virtually nil. There might not be any legal restrictions on such a marriage but they would face extreme social disapproval and possibly murder if they went ahead. If you don't believe that, please read up on India.

Please don't fall into the assumption that all straight people are legally or socially free to marry the person that they love. In many parts of the world, arguably covering the bulk of the world's population, straight people are prohibited from marrying according to their free choices.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

People were forced to knock on doors and discuss their lives with complete strangers just to ask for something that should never have been denied to a citizen in the first place.

As opposed to people being forced to go to open court and discuss their intimate lives in front of complete strangers, including the press?

Or people having to justify their private lives and sexual preferences to a group of elected representatives in parliament?

How are these methods in any way less humiliating than a referendum?

Bannasidhe wrote: »

He wasn't discussing the process - but bemoaning the fact that the process is necessary to force Ireland to abide by "The Irish Republic is entitled to, and hereby claims, the allegiance of every Irishman and Irishwoman. The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and all of its parts, cherishing all of the children of the nation equally and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past" 99 years after those word were spoken.

The Proclamation is not part of the Constitution. It never had any legal force and probably never will. All legal rights in democratic societies emerge from a process whereby they are voted into being. That's just a simple fact. Whether that vote is carried out in parliament or by the general public or by a court is immaterial to the fact that legal rights are ultimately granted by the majority.

santana75

I voted Yes on Friday because I believe that people should be free to choose what they do with their lives. I actually don't think there should've been a referendum in the first place, it shouldn't have been a decision en masse, it should be a choice made between two people.
Having said that, I don't get it. I was watching the news and there were people crying, people saying they were proud to be Irish and I feel like I've missed something. I get that this is a symbol for gay people but non gay people seem to be equally joyous (or at least they appear to be).
I was genuinely taken aback at the scenes I witnessed on the news and in town Saturday night, and I dunno I'd like to get it. I think it was the right thing to vote yes, but it was a decision that came from my head and not my heart.
I'd like to understand and feel what everyone else is, be happy for same sex couples but I just don't.

mailforkev

santana75 wrote: »

I voted Yes on Friday because I believe that people should be free to choose what they do with their lives. I actually don't think there should've been a referendum in the first place, it shouldn't have been a decision en masse, it should be a choice made between two people.
Having said that, I don't get it. I was watching the news and there were people crying, people saying they were proud to be Irish and I feel like I've missed something. I get that this is a symbol for gay people but non gay people seem to be equally joyous (or at least they appear to be).
I was genuinely taken aback at the scenes I witnessed on the news and in town Saturday night, and I dunno I'd like to get it. I think it was the right thing to vote yes, but it was a decision that came from my head and not my heart.
I'd like to understand and feel what everyone else is, be happy for same sex couples but I just don't.

Apart from straight people having gay friends/relatives that were now equal to them, it was also a statement of what kind of country do we want to live in.

To me, in a way it was about us deciding who owns Ireland now and going forward. And the answer was the regular decent citizens of all ages and backgrounds who voted to move on from the repression of the past and reject the fear peddled by a certain "institute".

As a married straight guy I had no skin in the game, so to speak, but I put on my Yes badge with pride and went out and celebrated on Sat night.

Ave Sodalis

jank wrote: »

So, this would be a good example to see. Can you give me an example that any high profile no campaigner called gay people a paedophile? Give any high profile name, not some wagon in the backend of nowhere shouting at the trees.

This is the issue though. A no voter/campaigner who equates homosexuality to paedophilia would be of course deemed a bigot/homophobe BUT it would not be fair then to say that ALL no voters are therefore bigots. Its a fallacy (Fallacy of composition to be precise)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

Can you point to any high profile Yes campaigner that called all No voters bigots? Give any high profile name, not some wagon in the backend of nowhere shouting at the trees.

This is the issue though. A Yes voter/campaigner who equates all voting no with bigotry would be of course unfair BUT it would not be fair then to say that you cannot ever use that word and that bigots should be allowed to say whatever they want without being called out. Its a fallacy (Fallacy of composition to be precise) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

thee glitz

I presume gay divorce is part of the package too?

El Weirdo

thee glitz wrote: »

I presume gay divorce is part of the package too?

No, just divorce.

traprunner

thee glitz wrote: »

I presume gay divorce is part of the package too?

What package? Marriage? Married people can divorce. There is nothing gay about it.

thee glitz

traprunner wrote: »

What package? Marriage? Married people can divorce. There is nothing gay about it.

Fair enough. I suppose it was called the Equality of Marriage referendum.

Bannasidhe

marmurr1916 wrote: »

What makes you think that it would have been automatic if he was straight? Straight people of differing races were denied the right to legally marry in many parts of the USA and other parts of the world, including South Africa, for centuries.

To this day there is no legal civil marriage in Israel. So if a straight couple, one of whom is Muslim, the other of whom is Jewish, wish to marry they have to either go abroad to do so or they have to find a rabbi/imam who would be willing to perform the ceremony.

I doubt very much that a straight Christian could legally marry a straight Muslim in Saudi Arabia without first converting to Islam.

The chances of a lower-caste Hindu woman marrying a Buddhist in India are virtually nil. There might not be any legal restrictions on such a marriage but they would face extreme social disapproval and possibly murder if they went ahead. If you don't believe that, please read up on India.

Please don't fall into the assumption that all straight people are legally or socially free to marry the person that they love. In many parts of the world, arguably covering the bulk of the world's population, straight people are prohibited from marrying according to their free choices.



As opposed to people being forced to go to open court and discuss their intimate lives in front of complete strangers, including the press?

Or people having to justify their private lives and sexual preferences to a group of elected representatives in parliament?

How are these methods in any way less humiliating than a referendum?



The Proclamation is not part of the Constitution. It never had any legal force and probably never will. All legal rights in democratic societies emerge from a process whereby they are voted into being. That's just a simple fact. Whether that vote is carried out in parliament or by the general public or by a court is immaterial to the fact that legal rights are ultimately granted by the majority.

You have so spectacularly missed the point that I can't be bothered explaining it again.

If you want a fight go fight with a feather.

Menas

Morrisey, the singer, has congratulated us on the outcome of the referendum...kind of!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/morrissey-tells-ireland-well-done-on-legalising-gay-marriage-try-harder-on-animal-rights-10275857.html

Irish Aris

Whisky Mac wrote: »

Morrisey, the singer, has congratulated us on the outcome of the referendum...kind of!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/morrissey-tells-ireland-well-done-on-legalising-gay-marriage-try-harder-on-animal-rights-10275857.html

yeah, that's the best you can get from Morrissey, alright. . .

Ash.J.Williams

Irish Aris wrote: »

yeah, that's the best you can get from Morrissey, alright. . .

unlikely to ban farming!

kunst nugget

Whisky Mac wrote: »

Morrisey, the singer, has congratulated us on the outcome of the referendum...kind of!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/morrissey-tells-ireland-well-done-on-legalising-gay-marriage-try-harder-on-animal-rights-10275857.html

‘Look, the gays can marry, I'm cool with that but they're not taking me bleedin' Full Irish Breakfast!!!’

keeponhurling

mailforkev wrote: »

To me, in a way it was about us deciding who owns Ireland now and going forward. And the answer was the regular decent citizens of all ages and backgrounds who voted to move on from the repression of the past and reject the fear peddled by a certain "institute".

.

We have always had referendums on changes like this to the constitution, done by secret ballot.

santana75

mailforkev wrote: »

Apart from straight people having gay friends/relatives that were now equal to them, it was also a statement of what kind of country do we want to live in.

To me, in a way it was about us deciding who owns Ireland now and going forward. And the answer was the regular decent citizens of all ages and backgrounds who voted to move on from the repression of the past and reject the fear peddled by a certain "institute".

I get all you say here and I'd be of the same opinion

mailforkev wrote: »

As a married straight guy I had no skin in the game, so to speak, but I put on my Yes badge with pride and went out and celebrated on Sat night.

Did you genuinely, from the heart, feel happy and wanted to celebrate or was it just something you did? For me this is the crux of the matter. I voted yes but I didnt feel anything when the result was announced. I didnt feel like hitting the town and celebrating, voting Yes was something I did because I thought it was the right decision. I dont have gay friends, I dont know any gay people at all really. Theres nobody in my family whos gay, there never was, as far as I know. So I have zero connection to the gay community and maybe this is the reason I dont feel any of the joy a lot of people seem to be experiencing right now.
The referendum has thrown up a lot of stuff for me, things that I have never had to confront out in the open. Like my attitude towards gay people. I grew up in a place where the macho was dialed up to 11 at all times and to be called gay was the worst insult you could throw at someone. We'd all make gay jokes without even thinking about it and its only now that Im realising how strong the conditioning we experienced was growing up. Its only in the last couple of years that ive questioned all of that and this referendum has really been an intense period of self reflection for me. I want to be happy for the gay people of Ireland, and Im envious of those who seem to be genuinely delighted at the result. But its just not there and I dont know if that makes me a bad person or a bigot even?

aloyisious

kunst nugget wrote: »

What's the P word?

Paedophile

Shrap

santana75 wrote: »

I want to be happy for the gay people of Ireland, and Im envious of those who seem to be genuinely delighted at the result. But its just not there and I dont know if that makes me a bad person or a bigot even?

I think wanting to be happy for gay people is your own class of joy in the occasion. I'm quite happy for you, for instance, that you've managed to reflect and rise above what you grew up to believe. I've no skin in your game, in that I've never had to change my mindset about the LGBT community, but I can appreciate the journey you've travelled.

I can quite imagine that it's a different kind of emotion you're feeling - and perhaps one that you're still processing about the change in your attitudes, and I hope you feel a sense of pride in yourself at least. The unabashed joy that I'm feeling (straight woman here) is maybe because I grew up knowing how unjust the inequality was. You should IMO feel unabashed joy that you have this new sense of inclusivity. I take my hat off to you mister. You're no bigot.

aloyisious

Whisky Mac wrote: »

Morrisey, the singer, has congratulated us on the outcome of the referendum...kind of!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/morrissey-tells-ireland-well-done-on-legalising-gay-marriage-try-harder-on-animal-rights-10275857.html

Is this the Independent running the "John waters is moving abroad to Uganda" story?

http://www.independent.co.ug/news/136-the-news-today/10282-irish-columnist-relocates-to-uganda-over-gay-marriage

Menas

aloyisious wrote: »

Is this the Independent running the "John waters is moving abroad to Uganda" story?

I suspect you are confusing two different papers.

aloyisious

Whisky Mac wrote: »

I suspect you are confusing two different papers.

Had to go back to F/B to get the link above, sorry for slow update of my last. Look's like they might be.

An Ciarraioch

santana75 wrote: »

I get all you say here and I'd be of the same opinion




Did you genuinely, from the heart, feel happy and wanted to celebrate or was it just something you did? For me this is the crux of the matter. I voted yes but I didnt feel anything when the result was announced. I didnt feel like hitting the town and celebrating, voting Yes was something I did because I thought it was the right decision. I dont have gay friends, I dont know any gay people at all really. Theres nobody in my family whos gay, there never was, as far as I know. So I have zero connection to the gay community and maybe this is the reason I dont feel any of the joy a lot of people seem to be experiencing right now.
The referendum has thrown up a lot of stuff for me, things that I have never had to confront out in the open. Like my attitude towards gay people. I grew up in a place where the macho was dialed up to 11 at all times and to be called gay was the worst insult you could throw at someone. We'd all make gay jokes without even thinking about it and its only now that Im realising how strong the conditioning we experienced was growing up. Its only in the last couple of years that ive questioned all of that and this referendum has really been an intense period of self reflection for me. I want to be happy for the gay people of Ireland, and Im envious of those who seem to be genuinely delighted at the result. But its just not there and I dont know if that makes me a bad person or a bigot even?

Absolutely not, I'm straight and know exactly the environment you mean. Like most people in their teens, there were times when I questioned my own sexuality, and while there were plenty of gay jokes flying around, I suspect it owed more to nervous lads trying to deal with their own emotions rather than any prejudice - certainly most of them were putting up Yes status messages on Facebook on Friday! Personally, I don't have any gay friends, but my sister does, so it was largely because of them that Saturday seemed such a seminal moment.

aloyisious

The vote result seemed to have a positive result for one elderly Dub gay man who came out to Joe on the JD radio show. He mentioned thinking about ending his life. Two neighbours heard him and recognized his voice, came on to talk to him, hadn't realised he was gay.

TheLastMohican

endacl wrote: »

Heh?

One presumes you meant, "Hi!"

mailforkev

santana75 wrote: »

Did you genuinely, from the heart, feel happy and wanted to celebrate or was it just something you did? For me this is the crux of the matter. I voted yes but I didnt feel anything when the result was announced. I didnt feel like hitting the town and celebrating, voting Yes was something I did because I thought it was the right decision. I dont have gay friends, I dont know any gay people at all really. Theres nobody in my family whos gay, there never was, as far as I know. So I have zero connection to the gay community and maybe this is the reason I dont feel any of the joy a lot of people seem to be experiencing right now.
The referendum has thrown up a lot of stuff for me, things that I have never had to confront out in the open. Like my attitude towards gay people. I grew up in a place where the macho was dialed up to 11 at all times and to be called gay was the worst insult you could throw at someone. We'd all make gay jokes without even thinking about it and its only now that Im realising how strong the conditioning we experienced was growing up. Its only in the last couple of years that ive questioned all of that and this referendum has really been an intense period of self reflection for me. I want to be happy for the gay people of Ireland, and Im envious of those who seem to be genuinely delighted at the result. But its just not there and I dont know if that makes me a bad person or a bigot even?

Yes, I was genuinely delighted when the first tallies came through on Saturday morning. The referendum was very important to me. To the point that I actively pursued Yes votes from my friends and family. I was responsible for convincing at least one friend to get out and vote at all and changed another friend from No to Yes by dispelling the misinformation he had heard.

You voted Yes because you knew that it was the right thing to do. You should be proud of yourself.

I feel that all the reflection that a huge number of people have had to do on both sides is a very good thing. It made us all think about where we are at and where we want to be. It has probably made us a better country.

The No side campaigned on family values without realising that after thousands of conversations nationwide and a lot of self-reflection it would actually be family values that won it for the Yes side.

We're all a bit bigoted about something, even the very best of us. I certainly wouldn't beat yourself up over it.

santana75

Shrap wrote: »

I think wanting to be happy for gay people is your own class of joy in the occasion. I'm quite happy for you, for instance, that you've managed to reflect and rise above what you grew up to believe. I've no skin in your game, in that I've never had to change my mindset about the LGBT community, but I can appreciate the journey you've travelled.

I can quite imagine that it's a different kind of emotion you're feeling - and perhaps one that you're still processing about the change in your attitudes, and I hope you feel a sense of pride in yourself at least. The unabashed joy that I'm feeling (straight woman here) is maybe because I grew up knowing how unjust the inequality was. You should IMO feel unabashed joy that you have this new sense of inclusivity. I take my hat off to you mister. You're no bigot.

Thanks for saying that. Its actually been an epic journey these last couple of years, with regards to the attitudes I grew up with and trying to turn them around. Your view is interesting to me, in that I find it hard to get my head around the fact that there are people who never had prejudices, from the word go, towards the gay community. That to me is incredible, and I mean that in a good way.

Shrap

santana75 wrote: »

I find it hard to get my head around the fact that there are people who never had prejudices.....

Ha, I read as far as prejudices without the "towards the gay community" at first....and thought "I didn't say I had no prejudices!". So like the previous poster said too - we probably all grow up having to shake off some prejudice that we were steered towards by our family, friends, culture, etc.

In my family, my mother (and her parents that we lived with) was a notorious social climber and an utter snob (she also got better with time) but I had a lot of work to do so as to get to a point where I didn't make assumptions about someone based on where they were born.

But thanks for your thanks

jobbridge4life

jank wrote: »

I was specifically referring to the atmosphere where peoples opinions can be freely aired without being cat called or heckled into silence. For me living in a society where people are free to air views which may not be mainstream is important, far more important in fact then endless debates on who can marry who.

Jank you did so in the context of the passage of the referendum. The inference was clear and frankly obviously intended. I truly believe in free speech and that means that the freedom to condemn enthusiastically and effusively the nonsense that people spout.

The only people who seek to constrain criticism are those who know they are wrong.

WoolyJumper

Shrap wrote: »

Ha, I read as far as prejudices without the "towards the gay community" at first....and thought "I didn't say I had no prejudices!". So like the previous poster said too - we probably all grow up having to shake off some prejudice that we were steered towards by our family, friends, culture, etc.

In my family, my mother (and her parents that we lived with) was a notorious social climber and an utter snob (she also got better with time) but I had a lot of work to do so as to get to a point where I didn't make assumptions about someone based on where they were born.

But thanks for your thanks

I find that interesting too. Did you grow up around gay people? I know for myself, I didn't know any gay people growing up but my family were anything but homophobic. They never had issues with gay people or homosexuality. My mother even said to me when I was kid that it wouldnt matter if I was gay or not. I don't even remember in school kids being called gay or being made fun of for not being a typical boy. Yet I still had serious issues coming to terms with my own sexuality, and certainly had a lot of internalised homophobia. I don't know where I got it from.

In saying that as a teenager I was very aware of the churches teaching of homosexuality. Though only once do I remember a religion teacher in Secondary school telling the class "I doesn't hate gay people, I just don't like the sin" I remember actually feeling relieved by that and thinking he was very progressive :rolleyes:

DARK-KNIGHT

jaysus a second thread on this subject? i suppose its a huge deal.....

so how many boardsies are getting married next year?

WoolyJumper

jank wrote: »

I am not on about the issue of Gay marriage itself, perhaps you should read my posts before you go off on one. I don't care if two men/women want to get hitched. None of my business what they do. The state should not dictate to free thinking adults who they can and cannot marry and I include polygamy in that.

I was specifically referring to the atmosphere where peoples opinions can be freely aired without being cat called or heckled into silence. For me living in a society where people are free to air views which may not be mainstream is important, far more important in fact then endless debates on who can marry who.

Jank, the thing about living in a free society is while you are allowed any opinion you want, people are equally allowed to respond in any manner they see fit.

Ave Sodalis

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

jaysus a second thread on this subject? i suppose its a huge deal.....

so how many boardsies are getting married next year?

Third, the first just didn't have the same name :P

frostyjacks

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Jank, the thing about living in a free society is while you are allowed any opinion you want, people are equally allowed to respond in any manner they see fit.

That sounds like like a licence to give abuse. I'd like to think different views would be respected in society.

kunst nugget

frostyjacks wrote: »

That sounds like like a licence to give abuse. I'd like to think different views would be respected in society.

So if I say 'Women should be banned from driving because their periods make them too irrational and prone to hysterics' or 'Hitler was right about the Jews, it's a pity he didn't get to finish them all off', I should be able to say them without people challenging me on them because I'm entitled to my opinion?

frostyjacks

kunst nugget wrote: »

So if I say 'Women should be banned from driving because their periods make them too irrational and prone to hysterics' or 'Hitler was right about the Jews, it's a pity he didn't get to finish them all off', I should be able to say them without people challenging me on them because I'm entitled to my opinion?

I'm not saying opinions can't be challenged, but they should be respected however strongly we disagree with them.

kunst nugget

frostyjacks wrote: »

I'm not saying opinions can't be challenged, but they should be respected however strongly we disagree with them.

Nah, imo, you've the right to your opinion and to express it (I firmly believe in the right to free speech no matter how repugnant I might find what a person says) but you don't have the right to have it respected.

Sofiztikated

frostyjacks wrote: »

I'm not saying opinions can't be challenged, but they should be respected however strongly we disagree with them.

Nonsense.

There are people that believe the earth is flat, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

There are people that believe the world is 6000 years old, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

There are people that believe that gay/lesbian couples will make horrific parents, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Opinions are like árseholes, everyone has one.

frostyjacks

kunst nugget wrote: »

Nah, imo, you've the right to your opinion and to express it (I firmly believe in the right to free speech no matter how repugnant I might find what a person says) but you don't have the right to have it respected.

That's the way I used to think about gay marriage though. Didn't buy into it and didn't have any respect for people campaigning for it. I realise now that's an ignorant attitude to have with people.

SaveOurLyric

kunst nugget wrote: »

So if I say 'Women should be banned from driving because their periods make them too irrational and prone to hysterics' or 'Hitler was right about the Jews, it's a pity he didn't get to finish them all off', I should be able to say them without people challenging me on them because I'm entitled to my opinion?

People can challenge you on the opinion itself. But they cannot challenge your right to hold that opinion however much they think it wrong or you are a nutter.

(there may be a nugget of truth in both your examples by the way).

SaveOurLyric

frostyjacks wrote: »

I'm not saying opinions can't be challenged, but they should be respected however strongly we disagree with them.

You dont need to respect the opinion. You can believe it is bonkers. But you do respect someone else's right to be bonkers and hold that opinion.

Shrap

WoolyJumper wrote: »

I find that interesting too. Did you grow up around gay people? I know for myself, I didn't know any gay people growing up but my family were anything but homophobic.

I was brought up atheist, as my parents had both thrown off their pious Catholic & Protestant backgrounds. I suppose I had none of the religious morality thrown at me at home, and didn't go to church. Also, they were very strongly principled about prejudice (although the Ma never managed to see her prejudice against the working class Catholic families as exactly the same thing :rolleyes:). Family friends whose kids I hung round with were best mates with David Norris, and so I grew up very much in a bubble, but with very much the same sense of equality as I hope the next generation will - that being gay is completely normal.

I didn't personally know any gay people till in my teens, my family met and became best friends with a male gay couple who were just part of the furniture for me - still are! I suppose I was aware that LGBT people had a massive struggle and were subject to extreme prejudice, but it never hit home as an issue for me to approach until I met other teens with a homophobic attitude.

Hope that answers the question!

Shrap

WoolyJumper wrote: »

I don't even remember in school kids being called gay or being made fun of for not being a typical boy. Yet I still had serious issues coming to terms with my own sexuality, and certainly had a lot of internalised homophobia. I don't know where I got it from.

Just had an additional thought to that - being female, I never noticed the "you're gay" thing as a teen that was presumably being flung at many boys my age by their peers, and I imagine it wasn't said to girls (still isn't, to my knowledge). Maybe it was the "nice" south dublin school I went to, but did kids in the 80's use "gay" or "f****t" as an insult back then so much as now? My youngest already getting that in 1st yr, and if he knew which little savage threw it at him, that'd be a very sorry boy right now. I'm on high alert to go charging up to the school the next time :mad:

Reiver

Shrap wrote: »

Just had an additional thought to that - being female, I never noticed the "you're gay" thing as a teen that was presumably being flung at many boys my age by their peers, and I imagine it wasn't said to girls (still isn't, to my knowledge). Maybe it was the "nice" south dublin school I went to, but did kids in the 80's use "gay" or "f****t" as an insult back then so much as now? My youngest already getting that in 1st yr, and if he knew which little savage threw it at him, that'd be a very sorry boy right now. I'm on high alert to go charging up to the school the next time :mad:

I remember in school that ******, bastard, ****, bollocks were all easily interchangeable as terms of affection and acceptance among the lads in my year. They're enjoying the chance to eff and blind while away from their parents.

And gay was used interchangeably with lame. Not as homosexual. Queer we actually used in its original meaning.

WoolyJumper

Shrap wrote: »

Just had an additional thought to that - being female, I never noticed the "you're gay" thing as a teen that was presumably being flung at many boys my age by their peers, and I imagine it wasn't said to girls (still isn't, to my knowledge). Maybe it was the "nice" south dublin school I went to, but did kids in the 80's use "gay" or "f****t" as an insult back then so much as now? My youngest already getting that in 1st yr, and if he knew which little savage threw it at him, that'd be a very sorry boy right now. I'm on high alert to go charging up to the school the next time :mad:

I was in primary school in the 90s and I don't remember gay or F****t being used as an insult. When I was a kid the worst thing you could be called was a "frigit" :pac: Secondary school though, I noticed it being used as an insult more.

Shrap

Reiver wrote: »

I remember in school that ******, bastard, ****, bollocks were all easily interchangeable as terms of affection and acceptance among the lads in my year. They're enjoying the chance to eff and blind while away from their parents.

And gay was used interchangeably with lame. Not as homosexual. Queer we actually used in its original meaning.

Hmm, I know what you're saying, but I bet the gay kids among you didn't have quite the same impression that it was a term of affection and acceptance! Ditto with gay=lame. Still does among my teen sons' peers. I can't write it off as them letting go when they're not around their parents tbh. Either of mine use any term describing gay people in a derogatory way and they get a full-length Mammy lecture. So they don't, any more :cool:

Shrap

WoolyJumper wrote: »

I was in primary school in the 90s and I don't remember gay or F****t being used as an insult. When I was a kid the worst thing you could be called was a "frigit" :pac: Secondary school though, I noticed it being used as an insult more.

Aaarghh! Oh yeah, that one. Ha, was on the receiving end of that one a few times. Stung

Reiver

Shrap wrote: »

Hmm, I know what you're saying, but I bet the gay kids among you didn't have quite the same impression that it was a term of affection and acceptance! Ditto with gay=lame. Still does among my teen sons' peers. I can't write it off as them letting go when they're not around their parents tbh. Either of mine use any term describing gay people in a derogatory way and they get a full-length Mammy lecture. So they don't, any more :cool:

Oh I agree absolutely! I just think that maybe it mightn't be wholly malicious. Teenage boys are not generally known for realising what effect their words can cause. It's just part of the image they're meant to have, you don't want to be seen as weak and you don't want to stand out. Probably one reason we've so many young lads kill themselves, there needs to be a change.

I think the first and second year of secondary were when I swore the most, I just had the chance to do it and no one was there to criticise me, it felt great.

Delighted to hear you explained to them. I think any derogatory words fro the disabled left my vocabulary about age 13 when I was introduced to my friend's brother with Downs Syndrome. Understanding the impact their words make will go a long way to help them not use it.

That said I do think we shouldn't let words have so much power. My English students here can't understand how wanker is an insult "but we all do it!" was their response.

mickstupp

WoolyJumper wrote: »

I was in primary school in the 90s and I don't remember gay or F****t being used as an insult.

I got it pretty much constantly from about 88 to 93. And I'm not even gay. People only stopped when I punched a guy in the face in the middle of class one day. Of course that started a whole new torment with people questioning my sanity for the next three years. Because people are ****ing dickheads.

Sunflower 27

Frigit? All these years I thought it was frigid.

Bannasidhe

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Frigit? All these years I thought it was frigid.

It's like Catlick not Catholic.
An Irish solution....


:pac:

WoolyJumper

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Frigit? All these years I thought it was frigid.

Yeah, I think it was supposed to be frigid but that's just how people said it in my school. Might be a cork thing :P

I remember the first time I was called a "frigit"

First they'd ask "heeerrree Woooooly r youuuuu figitttt!"
Ummmm Yeah? I replied not knowing what it meant.

"ahahaha Woooooly is still figittt biy"

"Heeerrreee Wooly, R you still a virrrgiin?"

"Pfft no", i replied thinking I was clever but not actually knowing what it meant

"Ewww mank biiiys, Wooly's not a virrrgin"

That was the extent of my being made fun of in school though :cool: