Sinn Fein's Paddy Holohan and homophobia

freshpopcorn

McMurphy wrote: »

Possibly.


Might be the same for Leo too all things considered, yes it's cool and trendy to have a gay mixed race Taoiseach, but I bet some of the more traditional conservative Fine Gael voters didn't see it that way.

I have no problems with his race or sexuality incidentally, as would the vast majority of people like me.

Swings and roundabouts I guess.

I'm not even 100% sure not but didn't the members of FG back Coveney over Leo.

McMurphy

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I'm not even 100% sure not but didn't the members of FG back Coveney over Leo.

Yep, coveney won the popular vote.

FrancieBrady

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Lies? Are you claiming I misrepresented you? The latent snobbery and superiority is evident in the piece of your OP I quoted. Its amusing to see you try and distance yourself from your own words. It has not just me that has seen the hypocrisy in your behaviour here.

It is a classic demonstration of the ambiguity that can be inherent in what is said and written.

Holohan says something that can clearly be taken in two ways.
Blanch says something that can clearly also be taken two ways.

I am willing to accept reasonable explanations from anybody. If there was accompanying historical evidence that Holohan was racist or homophobic then that would be a factor in judging him too. I haven't seen any tbh. Plenty of evidence that he is incoherent and a tad short of the full schilling though.

facehugger99

Deleted User wrote: »

I dont fully agree with what Houlihan says, but one thing that sticks out is that many leaders of nations have no children. Varadkar, Merkel, Macron, Trudeau. This is probably why they found it so easy to basically fúck a generation or two of people over with their policies and mismanagement

So people without kids are just more inherently prone to cruelty than those who've managed to impregnate someone?


Yeah, sounds like you fully agree with that Houlihan moron all right.

ghost of ireland past

I think having kids does make a difference to a person's outlook.

Leo is vacuous and seems only interested in himself and in preening himself. That's not good for a national leader.

markodaly

This thread is funny now.

Ash.J.Williams

I’ve always liked paddy but 2 seconds into the podcast it’s clear he’s not councillor material and I thought he’d do well.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is a classic demonstration of the ambiguity that can be inherent in what is said and written.

Holohan says something that can clearly be taken in two ways.
Blanch says something that can clearly also be taken two ways.

I am willing to accept reasonable explanations from anybody. If there was accompanying historical evidence that Holohan was racist or homophobic then that would be a factor in judging him too. I haven't seen any tbh. Plenty of evidence that he is incoherent and a tad short of the full schilling though.

Neither the SF leadership or Paddy himself have offered another non racist / homophobic / misoginistic version of his remarks. So i don't see any ambiguity.

Your interpretation could be at best described as xenophobic.

I wouldn't be too critical of SF on this as they were quick enough to sort it.

You were just too quick to jump to his defense as you thought that would remain the party position.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Neither the SF leadership or Paddy himself have offered another non racist / homophobic / misoginistic version of his remarks. So i don't see any ambiguity.

Your interpretation could be at best described as xenophobic.

I wouldn't be too critical of SF on this as they were quick enough to sort it.

You were just too quick to jump to his defense as you thought that would remain the party position.

Or the simpler explanation - I was able to make my own mind up, unfettered by trying to protect an election campaign.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Or the simpler explanation - I was able to make my own mind up, unfettered by trying to protect an election campaign.

So you believe Paddy was only stupid rather than racist etc and SF are wrong to suspend him?

Ash.J.Williams

jh79 wrote: »

So you believe Paddy was only stupid rather than racist etc and SF are wrong to suspend him?

I would say yes more stupid than racist, and sin Féin were correct to act, fg and ff would not have acted.

Ironicname

jh79 wrote:

So you believe Paddy was only stupid rather than racist etc and SF are wrong to suspend him?

I know it wasn't directed at me but my opinion is that his words were neither racist or homophobic but there is enough ambiguity in it for people to choose to frame it as that if they wished.

It was silly to say those things if he was running as a councillor as he should have been aware it would make him a target for anyone who wishes to smear him for his opinion.

In order to put forward his opinion and not get pilloried, he'd need to be much more eloquent and nuanced.

As for Sinn Fein, I can't blame them for suspending him because of the so-called cancel culture that is prevalent world wide at the moment and with an election looming.

jh79

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I would say yes more stupid than racist, and sin Féin were correct to act, fg and ff would not have acted.

More stupid implies it was somewhat racist?

I thought SF did ok with it. 24hrs too late but got there in the end.

Yet to hear a credible non racist/xenophobic interpretation of his remarks.

ghost of ireland past

Ordinary people have no problem with mild racism or mild homophobia. This hysteria about everything nowadays seems like exactly that, hysteria.

Paddy Holohan has taken a few slaps to the face and he's not hysterical. I don't want to be represented by Leo either.

Ordinary people engage in mild racism and mild homophobia all the time. Politicians need to accept that. The alternative is Trump.

People are entitled to hate Leo and to hate other people.

jh79

ghost of ireland past wrote: »

Ordinary people have no problem with mild racism or mild homophobia. This hysteria about everything nowadays seems like exactly that, hysteria.

Paddy Holohan has taken a few slaps to the face and he's not hysterical. I don't want to be represented by Leo either.

Ordinary people engage in mild racism and mild homophobia all the time. Politicians need to accept that. The alternative is Trump.

People are entitled to hate Leo and to hate other people.

Judging suitability for public office based on race is hardly mild.

StupidLikeAFox

ghost of ireland past wrote: »

Ordinary people have no problem with mild racism or mild homophobia.

Speak for yourself

Rufeo

This SF guy is saying what a lot of Irish people are thinking. Lot of racists here.

facehugger99

facehugger99 wrote: »

So people without kids are just more inherently prone to cruelty than those who've managed to impregnate someone?


Yeah, sounds like you fully agree with that Houlihan moron all right.

Of course i expected over simplified replies to roll in :rolleyes: Holohans point was that a politician with a young family 'might' (and this is the operative term here) be able to relate better to the plight of other parents having had to witness their children emigrating due to lack of work or opportunities in the country. Dont fully agree with him but can see where he is coming from.

Of course it probably doesnt apply to the current irish political spectrum because most of the TDs are millionaires whose kids will be looked after no matter what.

facehugger99

ghost of ireland past wrote: »

Ordinary people have no problem with mild racism or mild homophobia.

I think you're confusing 'ordinary' people with the racists and homophobes you hang around with.

Bambi

Bambi wrote: »

Don't abstain vote and start with every candidate you don't hate then work backwards

It sends a message

Its madness to give a candidate a number if you dont want them to be elected. Select who you want because if it goes to the 13th count that number 13 vote you gave to for example, Varadkar, could be as effective as the number 1 at that stage

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is a classic demonstration of the ambiguity that can be inherent in what is said and written.

Holohan says something that can clearly be taken in two ways.
Blanch says something that can clearly also be taken two ways.

I am willing to accept reasonable explanations from anybody. If there was accompanying historical evidence that Holohan was racist or homophobic then that would be a factor in judging him too. I haven't seen any tbh. Plenty of evidence that he is incoherent and a tad short of the full schilling though.

Leo Varadkar is on record as speaking out against gay marriage and suggestions that unemployed immigrants should be deported.

Obviously I'm not suggesting Leo's a homophobic racist but if you wanted to take his comments out of context you could.

Odhinn

Rufeo wrote: »

This SF guy is saying what a lot of Irish people are thinking. Lot of racists here.

He will hopefully be flung out on his ear for it.

tipptom

McMurphy wrote: »

Leo Varadkar is on record as speaking out against gay marriage and suggestions that unemployed immigrants should be deported.

Obviously I'm not suggesting Leo's a homophobic racist but if you wanted to take his comments out of context you could.

Stonewall Blanche is selective in his posts.

His new found offence on behalf of gay people only manages to manifest itself when it comes to SF.

Leo Varadkar handled this well because he knew there is a lot of previous statements of his would be thrown at him if he made a big issue out of it and the biased Irish media would be forced to bring them up.

Wrongway1985

facehugger99 wrote: »

I think you're confusing 'ordinary' people with the racists and homophobes you hang around with.

I actually implied that comment to be realistic myself it's really common to see comments on socials on say refugees being given care which is clearly a good thing but people will get Ireland uber alles and in an effort to strive for their own people belittle others as an offset. I can't subscribe to those opinions some may challenge them but I wouldn't say everyone who holds them is necessarily a malious racist, but ya Paddy seems to hold that mindset I'm not on board with that doesn't represent me so simply couldn't vote for him if he was running in my area.

McMurphy

tipptom wrote: »

Stonewall Blanche is selective in his posts.

His new found offence on behalf of gay people only manages to manifest itself when it comes to SF.

Leo Varadkar handled this well because he knew there is a lot of previous statements of his would be thrown at him if he made a big issue out of it and the biased Irish media would be forced to bring them up.

Nail on the head Tom, it's only a while back there was a great furore about some lad in FG calling the other a "N***er in the woodshed".

Leo seen the ammo available to be used against him here if he overplayed his hand like others are doing in the thread, he did the right thing accept the apologies however mealy mouthed, and move on.

By the way - I said on this thread the other day that I never heard of this lad before, the wife reminded me last night that I was watching him on Tommy Tiernan last week...

Didn't catch his name though.

Oh yea says I, and I thought he was a tool then too, he wouldn't be the fizziest can in the fridge.

Annasopra

ghost of ireland past wrote: »

I don't see anything seriously wrong with anything that Paddy has said.

I think he's an idiot and wrong about nearly everything but it is not offensive to tell a story about an underrage girl who attempted to blackmail a man.

That guy Terry Mahon is another total weirdo.

Very few redeeming features between both of them. Blindboy has more credibility. But idiots should be allowed to speak too.

I just don't see the offence that Mary Lou, and other, see.

You think its ok to joke about strangling your bitch?

Wrongway1985

McMurphy wrote: »

Leo seen the ammo available to be used against him here if he overplayed his hand like others are doing in the thread, he did the right thing accept the apologies however mealy mouthed, and move on.

Exactly my thoughts, the fact that it got traction and subsequently him deliver a response to a gammy apology he rightly knew the damage was done.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

So you believe Paddy was only stupid rather than racist etc and SF are wrong to suspend him?

They didn't move to suspend him until the comments about women. 'I believe that parts of what he said have been omitted from the narrative in order to pin the racist/homophobe' tag on him.
We live in an age when the 'allegation is enough' from rape, to abuse to being a racist or a homophobe.
In all the above 'allegations' I require proof. And it simply isn't there in what he rambled on about.

Again, my opinion from the beginning of this is that SF should never have had him on the ticket to begin with. So any move to get rid of him is justified IMO.

Augme

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Well when they originally comments came out they really backed him.
They see him at more traditional Sinn Fein than Mary Lou.
She may have even lost some of the more traditional Sinn Fein voters in the local elections last year.

The thing is, sinn Fein want to get rid of those kind of voters and rightfully so. They will get a party no where.

Odhinn

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Well when they originally comments came out they really backed him.
They see him at more traditional Sinn Fein than Mary Lou.
She may have even lost some of the more traditional Sinn Fein voters in the local elections last year.

Bull, tbh.



https://youtu.be/ZkFAeruvv4s