Sinn Fein's Paddy Holohan and homophobia

marieholmfan

hawley wrote: »

Leo has never felt the heat like this before. Expect more racist/homophobic attacks from Sinn Féin and their lackeys in the Irish media. Ordinary people need to call this out or else this election is going to be a major sh*tshow.

If he can't take the heat he can get out of the Kitchen.

Frankly we should be allowed to say almost anything true about our elected representatives; other than realistic threats to their physical wellbeing.

El Tarangu

McMurphy wrote: »

With respect, I don't think you understand my point.

Leo's comments could have been viewed as homophobic back then too.**

**If you were trying extremely hard to want to be outraged about something, and wanted to misrepresent him.

Btw, never heard of Paddy what's his name in my life before let alone want to defend him.

Fair enough. I think the context is important; if he had have made the comment about a childless straight man, I would have just thought it a bit odd. If it had been about a childless straight lady, I would have thought it a bit sexist, maybe. If he had just said the family part of the comment about Leo, I might have given him the benefit of the doubt; but the fact he combined it with talk about his Irish blood versus Leo's Indian blood makes me suspect that the whole thing was intended subtle appeal to people of a certain mindset.

jimgoose

Matt Barrett wrote: »

...no mention of the boy wonder using the homeless chap for point scoring.

He didn't. After going on for a couple of minutes in the usual vein about what an awful accident it was, he added that Dublin City Council and the Water Authority, who were responsible for the machinery on the canal, should be asked how such an awful thing could have happened. His pointing out that the (FF) Lord Mayor of Dublin is "politically responsible" for the Council was, at worst, a bit saucy.

marieholmfan

jimgoose wrote: »

He didn't. After going on for a couple of minutes in the usual vein about what an awful accident it was, he added that Dublin City Council and the Water Authority, who were responsible for the machinery on the canal, should be asked how such an awful thing could have happened. His pointing out that the (FF) Lord Mayor of Dublin is "politically responsible" for the Council was, at worst, a bit saucy.

He said that alot of the time there is a rush to comment and then the facts come out.

James Brown

jimgoose wrote: »

He didn't. After going on for a couple of minutes in the usual vein about what an awful accident it was, he added that Dublin City Council and the Water Authority, who were responsible for the machinery on the canal, should be asked how such an awful thing could have happened. His pointing out that the (FF) Lord Mayor of Dublin is "politically responsible" for the Council was, at worst, a bit saucy.

That's how you choose to read it.
All he had to do was show concern and give some assurances, but he took a swipe. Who the f*** brings up the mayor in such an instance? Give me a break.

CrankyHaus

Matt Barrett wrote: »

A bit ignorant but not homophobic or racist. Basically thinks you need be from a certain demographic to understand it, which is stupid and ignorant.
I see this features heavily over on RTE with no mention of the boy wonder using the homeless chap for point scoring.

It's a good taster of how this campaign's going to go : relentless mud slinging and misrepresentation, and everyone's already at it, not just FG.

The Phantom Jipper

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's how you choose to read it.
All he had to do was show concern and give some assurances, but he took a swipe. Who the f*** brings up the mayor in such an instance? Give me a break.

It's no coincidence that his pal Noel Rock is in a spot of bother in that constituency aswell

Yurt2

super_furry wrote: »

The worst thing about all this is that it lets Fine Gael and Eoin Murphy off the hook. All the focus, the entire media cycle was on Fine Gael's failed housing policies and that poor homeless man who was bulldozed while in a tent with Murphy face leering down on everyone.

Now the entire media cycle has changed to this Yellow-Pack McGregor wanabee.

Just over three weeks to go. Plenty of time for the inevitable series of FG clangers.

Can't wait to see Leo in debates. My money is on him turning very ill-tempered when the heat is on under the bright studio lights and when he's challenged.

marieholmfan

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's how you choose to read it.
All he had to do was show concern and give some assurances, but he took a swipe. Who the f*** brings up the mayor in such an instance? Give me a break.

He forgot that the normal reaction to a homeless man being crippled is shock and empathy.
I'm sure he'll apologise when after a chat with the spin team.

jimgoose

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's how you choose to read it.
All he had to do was show concern and give some assurances, but he took a swipe. Who the f*** brings up the mayor in such an instance? Give me a break.

He just needs to download the latest software updates.

marieholmfan

Yurt! wrote: »

Just over three weeks to go. Plenty of time for the inevitable series of FG clangers.

Can't wait to see Leo in debates. My money is on him turning very ill-tempered when the heat is on under the bright studio lights and when he's challenged.

That could be a vote winner. Leo seems competent. Like when I hear him talk he sounds like a safe pair of hands.

marieholmfan

Quickest answer to Sinn Fein is just 'you could increase LPT and build council houses in Dublin so why don't you?'

James Brown

marieholmfan wrote: »

Quickest answer to Sinn Fein is just 'you could increase LPT and build council houses in Dublin so why don't you?'

Yes one of their lot was pushing for more PPP style some time ago. Are these lads getting gifts behind the scenes or what? It's obviously not a good model.
Saying they'll build now. If most parties say that any coalition should see it happen hopefully.

WrenBoy

So is "Family Man" added to the list of hateful phrases now or what ??

Yurt2

marieholmfan wrote: »

That could be a vote winner. Leo seems competent. Like when I hear him talk he sounds like a safe pair of hands.

We get hints of it during Dáil question time, when a question gets asked that makes FG look foolish, he gets extremely bratty.

Most people don't bother their a*se with Oireachtas TV, but there'll be a lot more eyes on the debates and my suspicion is he won't go over well when he gets petulant on live TV in front of the nation.

Dytalus

WrenBoy wrote: »

So is "Family Man" added to the list of hateful phrases now or what ??

Not in and of itself. It's like the word "bankers" or "globalists" - nothing overly awful about those words in and of themselves. But they are used excessively by anti-semites to covertly refer to Jewish people. They can then defend a comment along the lines of "globalists/bankers are destroying X" by saying "point out what in there is racist. Everyone knows what they mean, and they think they're being clever by not openly disparaging jewish people. Racists online use terms like "immigrants" when referring to people who were born and raised in Ireland with citizenship, but may have ethnically diverse backgrounds/appearances. "Oh but I didn't say [insert racial group here] go home, did I?" they say, while smugly clapping themselves on the back.

"Family man" has a similar (though, from what I've seen, much less prevalent) problem. When used by a regular speaker, in regular discourse there's no issue. But it does get used by bigots to avoid saying things like "gay men shouldn't be allowed X" out in the open. In the same way that "family values" is used as a phrase to mean homosexual people shouldn't be allowed marry/adopt.

I don't know enough about Holohan to know if he has a streak of homophobia in his past which would indicate that was his intent. He could (just as ignorantly, imo) be implying that people without children shouldn't be Taoiseach - never mind there could be any myriad of reasons they can't or won't have kids. I won't make a call either way on what I think he means. But the "he never actually said gay" isn't the rock solid defence you think it is.

Language and communication is enormously malleable. Words and phrases are not ironclad in their meaning - context matters hugely. Tone (when speaking) matters. Heck, even text formatting matters when on a forum.

marieholmfan

Dytalus wrote: »

Not in and of itself. It's like the word "bankers" or "globalists" - nothing overly awful about those words in and of themselves. But they are used excessively by anti-semites to covertly refer to Jewish people. They can then defend a comment along the lines of "globalists/bankers are destroying X" by saying "point out what in there is racist. Everyone knows what they mean, and they think they're being clever by not openly disparaging jewish people. Racists online use terms like "immigrants" when referring to people who were born and raised in Ireland with citizenship, but may have ethnically diverse backgrounds/appearances. "Oh but I didn't say [insert racial group here] go home, did I?" they say, while smugly clapping themselves on the back.

"Family man" has a similar (though, from what I've seen, much less prevalent) problem. When used by a regular speaker, in regular discourse there's no issue. But it does get used by bigots to avoid saying things like "gay men shouldn't be allowed X" out in the open. In the same way that "family values" is used as a phrase to mean homosexual people shouldn't be allowed marry/adopt.

I don't know enough about Holohan to know if he has a streak of homophobia in his past which would indicate that was his intent. He could (just as ignorantly, imo) be implying that people without children shouldn't be Taoiseach - never mind there could be any myriad of reasons they can't or won't have kids. I won't make a call either way on what I think he means. But the "he never actually said gay" isn't the rock solid defence you think it is.

Language and communication is enormously malleable. Words and phrases are not ironclad in their meaning - context matters hugely. Tone (when speaking) matters. Heck, even text formatting matters when on a forum.

Interesting - Varadkar doesn't believe that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt or to marry; at least that's what he was saying 8 years ago.

Dytalus

marieholmfan wrote: »

Interesting - Varadkar doesn't believe that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt or to marry; at least that's what he was saying 8 years ago.

I'm not surprised. There's no rule saying gay people have to discard the "one mother, one father" viewpoint. I doubt he's the only gay man in Ireland who agrees with that point of view. I've known gay men who disagreed (presumably still do, I haven't talked to them in a long time) with same sex marriage. Nothing says LGBT people have to be socially liberal.

Although it was 8 years ago - his view may well have changed in the interim. Or heck, he could have just been saying it to garner political support from the population - being a politician and all. Varadkar has some decidedly conservative viewpoints.

FrancieBrady

Fair old lesson here for FG in how to get out ahead of a story. SF emphatic on what they want to happen here. Story will move on quickly.

Awfully stupid way to make a point by Holohan.

Nift

The Satanist wrote: »

I don't want a billionaire as Taoiseach, I'd rather someone on a normal wage of normal means.

Is that offensive?

So Varadkar's a billionaire now is he? i can't remember the last billionaire taoiseach myself

Clumsy from Holohon.

Does he have an issue with other childless ministers etc as Noel Rock saids

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

A bit ignorant but not homophobic or racist. Basically thinks you need be from a certain demographic to understand it, which is stupid and ignorant.
I see this features heavily over on RTE with no mention of the boy wonder using the homeless chap for point scoring.

I am not surprised that you don't understand how an indirect reference to the sexuality of a politician is homophobic. This little paragraph might explain it to you better:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Family_values

"In contemporary American politics, "family values" is known as a code word or dog whistle — something that disguises more hateful aspects of an agenda as something nice and innocent. It refers to a part of the Christian right-wing agenda of "God, gays and abortion." By using a code word that is carefully chosen, a politician (or person) can say they are "for family values" and sound as all-American as apple pie, but what they mean is that they intend to promote this particular narrow and anti-intellectual agenda. Their opponent is stuck in a foolish tangle of phraseology - how can they say they are against "family values"? And yet calling them on it doesn't work either, since it sounds boorish to accuse someone of not really being for "family values".

Thus the group bringing the issues of abortion, homosexuality and school prayer into the political arena does not have to use any of those words, but their opponent has to in order to confront them, making them seem more "narrow issue" oriented."

We have seen all of these behaviours in this thread, as I said quite an eye-opener.

Nift

https://www.joe.ie/politics/sinn-fein-call-councillor-paddy-holohan-apologise-varadkar-comments-691053

ah he can **** right off now....

"Leo Varadkar’s blood ­obviously runs to India. His great-grandfather is not part of the history of this ­country. Now Leo obviously is.

"He’s an Irish ­citizen but his ­passion doesn’t go back to the times when our passion goes back to."

marieholmfan

blanch152 wrote: »

I am not surprised that you don't understand how an indirect reference to the sexuality of a politician is homophobic. This little paragraph might explain it to you better:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Family_values

"In contemporary American politics, "family values" is known as a code word or dog whistle — something that disguises more hateful aspects of an agenda as something nice and innocent. It refers to a part of the Christian right-wing agenda of "God, gays and abortion." By using a code word that is carefully chosen, a politician (or person) can say they are "for family values" and sound as all-American as apple pie, but what they mean is that they intend to promote this particular narrow and anti-intellectual agenda. Their opponent is stuck in a foolish tangle of phraseology - how can they say they are against "family values"? And yet calling them on it doesn't work either, since it sounds boorish to accuse someone of not really being for "family values".

Thus the group bringing the issues of abortion, homosexuality and school prayer into the political arena does not have to use any of those words, but their opponent has to in order to confront them, making them seem more "narrow issue" oriented."

We have seen all of these behaviours in this thread, as I said quite an eye-opener.

There is no reference direct or otherwise to Varadkar's sexuality.
That said the Taoiseach must be able to take the heat or just get out of the kitchen. I don't care if his feelings are hurt.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Fair old lesson here for FG in how to get out ahead of a story. SF emphatic on what they want to happen here. Story will move on quickly.

Awfully stupid way to make a point by Holohan.

And what point was Holohan trying to make?

Only straight Irish people with children should be Taoiseach?

I am struggling to understand the point he was making, perhaps you might elaborate.

blanch152

marieholmfan wrote: »

There is no reference direct or otherwise to Varadkar's sexuality.
That said the Taoiseach must be able to take the heat or just get out of the kitchen. I don't care if his feelings are hurt.

Varadkar hasn't said anything about this, but Sinn Fein have said that the comments are offensive.

You think that they are fine, I am with Sinn Fein.

marieholmfan

blanch152 wrote: »

And what point was Holohan trying to make?

Only straight Irish people with children should be Taoiseach?

I am struggling to understand the point he was making, perhaps you might elaborate.

Sexuality wasn't mentioned. I know that the blueshirts have always been obsessed with **** (as Charlie Flanagan's dear old da used to say) but I think your neuroses are showing darling.

marieholmfan

blanch152 wrote: »

Varadkar hasn't said anything about this, but Sinn Fein have said that the comments are offensive.

You think that they are fine, I am with Sinn Fein.

I believe you - like Sinn Fein you would not like to see LPT raised to pay for council houses.

suicide_circus

every party gets one gaff during the campaign, this is SF's

Balf

Marjorie Huge Stockbroker wrote: »

Does anyone know which podcast the comments were made on? Has anyone actually listened to the podcast?

It's here:

https://youtu.be/tqxba94oVmM?t=5397

Have to say, I'm strongly impressed by the depth of his thought on this topic.

Naw. He's thick as two short planks.

Sort of interesting that he makes the comments in a podcast where he's in conversation with Ibrahim Halawa. Funny old world.

jimgoose

marieholmfan wrote: »

...I know that the blueshirts have always been obsessed with sodomites...

I never got that - the Stag was a much better car.