General Chit Chat

[Enoch]

There is nothing homophobic in that tweet.

If anyone should be offended it's the fella who's very existence is being disparaged.

[Prufrock]

I think it's possible for people to have differing opinions on the same thing in good faith without either of them being dishonest or trying to shut down debate or any of that (get me, in this economy).

I think the joke's fine. I don't think it's homophobic on its merits and I'm broadly for people chilling the feck out on joke's and letting things go.

Buuut, whilst IMO not homophobic, it's also not definitely not. And, it's deliberately provocative. You can't then whine if someone calls you homophobic. I think she's wrong but I can see how she got there.

He's the mard prick trying to sue because the nasty lady said the mean thing.

It's health and safety gone mad, Stew.

[Enoch]

To be fair, he's the mard prick trying to sue because the nasty lady went into print about the thing. If she'd just said it to all her friends who'd have given a toss?

Interesting that the Labour Party have cut the funding for her defence, wonder what their motivation is.

[TANGODANCER]

This whole business of racism and bias against peoples definitions of what they are or are not can be far easier explained/understood, if it's accepted that we aren't a race of cloned robots and that idiots do exist in ever walk of society regardless of personality, sexual leanings, occupations or geographic tent-pitching. In short, don't class the whole world as biased dimwits. Far too much (in my opinion) is highlighted about things that are supposedly struggling to be accepted as equal, yet constantly trumpet their own differences with parades and celebrations making them obviously different where such difference shouldn't exist at all and maybe wouldn't be as obvious if not accompanied by media light shows, rainbow circuses and pride-parades. This latest fiasco being discussed could have been dealt privately with in house, not by jury planet-Facebook.

Sexual preferences weren't invented in 1950, way back in 1050, and certainly not in 2000. It's all been going on since time immemorial. With all due respects, I'm almost willing to bet most folk wouldn't care who or what you are if you didn't think it necessary to keep telling them and just get on with life.. I certainly wouldn't, but then again I'm one of those old-fashioned ancients who believe sex is a private thing that should be confined to bedrooms not blasted all over Twitter or Facebook sites. If that were the case, who would need to tell anybody anything, and how many would really care anyway?

Merely expressing a personal view.

[Dujon]

Oh, dear, oh, dear.
I have been re-reading Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 and am now cogitating on the world he predicted and the one in which I now live. This is not to say that I expect his world to become ours, but we are getting close.

[TANGODANCER]

Bolton News must be really struggling for something to report when their headline is a about a "Swinger" complaining about conditions in his local B.D.S.M club, poor chap. Here is the news....

[Enoch]

Just whipping up a bit of interest.

[BWFC_Insane]

This whole business of racism and bias against peoples definitions of what they are or are not can be far easier explained/understood, if it's accepted that we aren't a race of cloned robots and that idiots do exist in ever walk of society regardless of personality, sexual leanings, occupations or geographic tent-pitching. In short, don't class the whole world as biased dimwits. Far too much (in my opinion) is highlighted about things that are supposedly struggling to be accepted as equal, yet constantly trumpet their own differences with parades and celebrations making them obviously different where such difference shouldn't exist at all and maybe wouldn't be as obvious if not accompanied by media light shows, rainbow circuses and pride-parades. This latest fiasco being discussed could have been dealt privately with in house, not by jury planet-Facebook.

Sexual preferences weren't invented in 1950, way back in 1050, and certainly not in 2000. It's all been going on since time immemorial. With all due respects, I'm almost willing to bet most folk wouldn't care who or what you are if you didn't think it necessary to keep telling them and just get on with life.. I certainly wouldn't, but then again I'm one of those old-fashioned ancients who believe sex is a private thing that should be confined to bedrooms not blasted all over Twitter or Facebook sites. If that were the case, who would need to tell anybody anything, and how many would really care anyway?

Merely expressing a personal view.

The problem with that view is it rather suggests that you're not happy for two gay men to be "out in public"? I'm sure that isn't your point.

But it isn't just about "sex" I think its perfectly reasonable for someone to dislike public displays across the board. Or to find dressing suggestively upsetting across the board.

I think though when those things only apply to same sex relationships or only to two men or whatever then that is a problem.

The reason gay people celebrate their sexuality publicly is because for centuries they were not able to...

[Prufrock]

To be fair, he's the mard prick trying to sue because the nasty lady went into print about the thing. If she'd just said it to all her friends who'd have given a toss?

Interesting that the Labour Party have cut the funding for her defence, wonder what their motivation is.

And the nasty lady went into print because the mard prick tweeted the joke.

If you put yourself in the public sphere you can't complain if people disagree or call you out in the public sphere. To then whine "libel" and still come out as the hero of the free-speech can't say no anymore is quite the conjuring trick, I'll grant him.

[TANGODANCER]

This whole business of racism and bias against peoples definitions of what they are or are not can be far easier explained/understood, if it's accepted that we aren't a race of cloned robots and that idiots do exist in ever walk of society regardless of personality, sexual leanings, occupations or geographic tent-pitching. In short, don't class the whole world as biased dimwits. Far too much (in my opinion) is highlighted about things that are supposedly struggling to be accepted as equal, yet constantly trumpet their own differences with parades and celebrations making them obviously different where such difference shouldn't exist at all and maybe wouldn't be as obvious if not accompanied by media light shows, rainbow circuses and pride-parades. This latest fiasco being discussed could have been dealt privately with in house, not by jury planet-Facebook.

Sexual preferences weren't invented in 1950, way back in 1050, and certainly not in 2000. It's all been going on since time immemorial. With all due respects, I'm almost willing to bet most folk wouldn't care who or what you are if you didn't think it necessary to keep telling them and just get on with life.. I certainly wouldn't, but then again I'm one of those old-fashioned ancients who believe sex is a private thing that should be confined to bedrooms not blasted all over Twitter or Facebook sites. If that were the case, who would need to tell anybody anything, and how many would really care anyway?

Merely expressing a personal view.

The problem with that view is it rather suggests that you're not happy for two gay men to be "out in public"? I'm sure that isn't your point.

Ah, Brother Sanctamonicus Pontificus appears out of the fog to lead me to salvation. There isn't a problem with "that view" unless it's yours as in your eternal, divine right to tell me what I think or mean. Nothing new there obviously. I thought I'd done that? It's clear enough."It rather suggests" ? indicating any view that isn't yours is wrong even if it's one you made up? Try having an original thought. Get a grip, read the post and pass on. Nothing to see here.

[Enoch]

To be fair, he's the mard prick trying to sue because the nasty lady went into print about the thing. If she'd just said it to all her friends who'd have given a toss?

Interesting that the Labour Party have cut the funding for her defence, wonder what their motivation is.

And the nasty lady went into print because the mard prick tweeted the joke.

If you put yourself in the public sphere you can't complain if people disagree or call you out in the public sphere. To then whine "libel" and still come out as the hero of the free-speech can't say no anymore is quite the conjuring trick, I'll grant him.

Indeed, one lives and dies by the sword.

Yet only metaphorically as libel law exists so folk cannot bandy about unfounded accusations largely as a response to the outlawing of dueling.

Funny ol' game.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

^
I have absolutely no idea what that exchange is about.
I note however everfxcker in the universe seems to be upset about Montenegro 'fans'.
I can only say that, just now, five minutes ago, a bunch of
Estuary English spouting tosspotss wearing crusader gear and absolutely pissed out of their boxes have just stood on a table in a pub/cafe in Rijeka and in full public view pissed into a litre pot!
What the fxck is the world coming to?

[BWFC_Insane]

This whole business of racism and bias against peoples definitions of what they are or are not can be far easier explained/understood, if it's accepted that we aren't a race of cloned robots and that idiots do exist in ever walk of society regardless of personality, sexual leanings, occupations or geographic tent-pitching. In short, don't class the whole world as biased dimwits. Far too much (in my opinion) is highlighted about things that are supposedly struggling to be accepted as equal, yet constantly trumpet their own differences with parades and celebrations making them obviously different where such difference shouldn't exist at all and maybe wouldn't be as obvious if not accompanied by media light shows, rainbow circuses and pride-parades. This latest fiasco being discussed could have been dealt privately with in house, not by jury planet-Facebook.

Sexual preferences weren't invented in 1950, way back in 1050, and certainly not in 2000. It's all been going on since time immemorial. With all due respects, I'm almost willing to bet most folk wouldn't care who or what you are if you didn't think it necessary to keep telling them and just get on with life.. I certainly wouldn't, but then again I'm one of those old-fashioned ancients who believe sex is a private thing that should be confined to bedrooms not blasted all over Twitter or Facebook sites. If that were the case, who would need to tell anybody anything, and how many would really care anyway?

Merely expressing a personal view.

The problem with that view is it rather suggests that you're not happy for two gay men to be "out in public"? I'm sure that isn't your point.

Ah, Brother Sanctamonicus Pontificus appears out of the fog to lead me to salvation. There isn't a problem with "that view" unless it's yours as in your eternal, divine right to tell me what I think or mean. Nothing new there obviously. I thought I'd done that? It's clear enough."It rather suggests" ? indicating any view that isn't yours is wrong even if it's one you made up? Try having an original thought. Get a grip, read the post and pass on. Nothing to see here.

You know what - the point about expressing opinions, especially using a medium such as the internet is you will have people question them.

If you are so set in your ways as to not want, what was a fairly gentle discussion about your view, then why bother posting it in the first place?

You also ignore my major contention - that the reason we have gay pride and the like is because such public expressions of homosexuality were not allowed up until fairly recent history and they want to celebrate that fact. Nobody is stopping you from having a parade about anything you like.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

This whole business of racism and bias against peoples definitions of what they are or are not can be far easier explained/understood, if it's accepted that we aren't a race of cloned robots and that idiots do exist in ever walk of society regardless of personality, sexual leanings, occupations or geographic tent-pitching. In short, don't class the whole world as biased dimwits. Far too much (in my opinion) is highlighted about things that are supposedly struggling to be accepted as equal, yet constantly trumpet their own differences with parades and celebrations making them obviously different where such difference shouldn't exist at all and maybe wouldn't be as obvious if not accompanied by media light shows, rainbow circuses and pride-parades. This latest fiasco being discussed could have been dealt privately with in house, not by jury planet-Facebook.

Sexual preferences weren't invented in 1950, way back in 1050, and certainly not in 2000. It's all been going on since time immemorial. With all due respects, I'm almost willing to bet most folk wouldn't care who or what you are if you didn't think it necessary to keep telling them and just get on with life.. I certainly wouldn't, but then again I'm one of those old-fashioned ancients who believe sex is a private thing that should be confined to bedrooms not blasted all over Twitter or Facebook sites. If that were the case, who would need to tell anybody anything, and how many would really care anyway?

Merely expressing a personal view.

The problem with that view is it rather suggests that you're not happy for two gay men to be "out in public"? I'm sure that isn't your point.

Ah, Brother Sanctamonicus Pontificus appears out of the fog to lead me to salvation. There isn't a problem with "that view" unless it's yours as in your eternal, divine right to tell me what I think or mean. Nothing new there obviously. I thought I'd done that? It's clear enough."It rather suggests" ? indicating any view that isn't yours is wrong even if it's one you made up? Try having an original thought. Get a grip, read the post and pass on. Nothing to see here.

You know what - the point about expressing opinions, especially using a medium such as the internet is you will have people question them.

If you are so set in your ways as to not want, what was a fairly gentle discussion about your view, then why bother posting it in the first place?

You also ignore my major contention - that the reason we have gay pride and the like is because such public expressions of homosexuality were not allowed up until fairly recent history and they want to celebrate that fact. Nobody is stopping you from having a parade about anything you like.

What next? Dogging in public. Maybe they could join the Montenegro fans making monkey chants while the crusaders encourage the buggerings by voluminously pissing into ever bigger pots!
There are limits. Well there are for me.

[BWFC_Insane]

This whole business of racism and bias against peoples definitions of what they are or are not can be far easier explained/understood, if it's accepted that we aren't a race of cloned robots and that idiots do exist in ever walk of society regardless of personality, sexual leanings, occupations or geographic tent-pitching. In short, don't class the whole world as biased dimwits. Far too much (in my opinion) is highlighted about things that are supposedly struggling to be accepted as equal, yet constantly trumpet their own differences with parades and celebrations making them obviously different where such difference shouldn't exist at all and maybe wouldn't be as obvious if not accompanied by media light shows, rainbow circuses and pride-parades. This latest fiasco being discussed could have been dealt privately with in house, not by jury planet-Facebook.

Sexual preferences weren't invented in 1950, way back in 1050, and certainly not in 2000. It's all been going on since time immemorial. With all due respects, I'm almost willing to bet most folk wouldn't care who or what you are if you didn't think it necessary to keep telling them and just get on with life.. I certainly wouldn't, but then again I'm one of those old-fashioned ancients who believe sex is a private thing that should be confined to bedrooms not blasted all over Twitter or Facebook sites. If that were the case, who would need to tell anybody anything, and how many would really care anyway?

Merely expressing a personal view.

The problem with that view is it rather suggests that you're not happy for two gay men to be "out in public"? I'm sure that isn't your point.

Ah, Brother Sanctamonicus Pontificus appears out of the fog to lead me to salvation. There isn't a problem with "that view" unless it's yours as in your eternal, divine right to tell me what I think or mean. Nothing new there obviously. I thought I'd done that? It's clear enough."It rather suggests" ? indicating any view that isn't yours is wrong even if it's one you made up? Try having an original thought. Get a grip, read the post and pass on. Nothing to see here.

You know what - the point about expressing opinions, especially using a medium such as the internet is you will have people question them.

If you are so set in your ways as to not want, what was a fairly gentle discussion about your view, then why bother posting it in the first place?

You also ignore my major contention - that the reason we have gay pride and the like is because such public expressions of homosexuality were not allowed up until fairly recent history and they want to celebrate that fact. Nobody is stopping you from having a parade about anything you like.

What next? Dogging in public. Maybe they could join the Montenegro fans making monkey chants while the crusaders encourage the buggerings by voluminously pissing into ever bigger pots!
There are limits. Well there are for me.

There are for everyone, but those limits will be different.

I have no issue with that - what issue I do have personally, is when people selectively apply those limits to different groups. You only need go out in Bolton on a Friday night to see all sorts of things that no doubt will stretch many people's limits. What I personally think is unacceptable is if you would tolerate a man and a woman doing something in public yet would not find two men doing the same acceptable.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

This whole business of racism and bias against peoples definitions of what they are or are not can be far easier explained/understood, if it's accepted that we aren't a race of cloned robots and that idiots do exist in ever walk of society regardless of personality, sexual leanings, occupations or geographic tent-pitching. In short, don't class the whole world as biased dimwits. Far too much (in my opinion) is highlighted about things that are supposedly struggling to be accepted as equal, yet constantly trumpet their own differences with parades and celebrations making them obviously different where such difference shouldn't exist at all and maybe wouldn't be as obvious if not accompanied by media light shows, rainbow circuses and pride-parades. This latest fiasco being discussed could have been dealt privately with in house, not by jury planet-Facebook.

Sexual preferences weren't invented in 1950, way back in 1050, and certainly not in 2000. It's all been going on since time immemorial. With all due respects, I'm almost willing to bet most folk wouldn't care who or what you are if you didn't think it necessary to keep telling them and just get on with life.. I certainly wouldn't, but then again I'm one of those old-fashioned ancients who believe sex is a private thing that should be confined to bedrooms not blasted all over Twitter or Facebook sites. If that were the case, who would need to tell anybody anything, and how many would really care anyway?

Merely expressing a personal view.

The problem with that view is it rather suggests that you're not happy for two gay men to be "out in public"? I'm sure that isn't your point.

Ah, Brother Sanctamonicus Pontificus appears out of the fog to lead me to salvation. There isn't a problem with "that view" unless it's yours as in your eternal, divine right to tell me what I think or mean. Nothing new there obviously. I thought I'd done that? It's clear enough."It rather suggests" ? indicating any view that isn't yours is wrong even if it's one you made up? Try having an original thought. Get a grip, read the post and pass on. Nothing to see here.

You know what - the point about expressing opinions, especially using a medium such as the internet is you will have people question them.

If you are so set in your ways as to not want, what was a fairly gentle discussion about your view, then why bother posting it in the first place?

You also ignore my major contention - that the reason we have gay pride and the like is because such public expressions of homosexuality were not allowed up until fairly recent history and they want to celebrate that fact. Nobody is stopping you from having a parade about anything you like.

What next? Dogging in public. Maybe they could join the Montenegro fans making monkey chants while the crusaders encourage the buggerings by voluminously pissing into ever bigger pots!
There are limits. Well there are for me.

There are for everyone, but those limits will be different.

I have no issue with that - what issue I do have personally, is when people selectively apply those limits to different groups. You only need go out in Bolton on a Friday night to see all sorts of things that no doubt will stretch many people's limits. What I personally think is unacceptable is if you would tolerate a man and a woman doing something in public yet would not find two men doing the same acceptable.

Strangely enough, I agree.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

This whole business of racism and bias against peoples definitions of what they are or are not can be far easier explained/understood, if it's accepted that we aren't a race of cloned robots and that idiots do exist in ever walk of society regardless of personality, sexual leanings, occupations or geographic tent-pitching. In short, don't class the whole world as biased dimwits. Far too much (in my opinion) is highlighted about things that are supposedly struggling to be accepted as equal, yet constantly trumpet their own differences with parades and celebrations making them obviously different where such difference shouldn't exist at all and maybe wouldn't be as obvious if not accompanied by media light shows, rainbow circuses and pride-parades. This latest fiasco being discussed could have been dealt privately with in house, not by jury planet-Facebook.

Sexual preferences weren't invented in 1950, way back in 1050, and certainly not in 2000. It's all been going on since time immemorial. With all due respects, I'm almost willing to bet most folk wouldn't care who or what you are if you didn't think it necessary to keep telling them and just get on with life.. I certainly wouldn't, but then again I'm one of those old-fashioned ancients who believe sex is a private thing that should be confined to bedrooms not blasted all over Twitter or Facebook sites. If that were the case, who would need to tell anybody anything, and how many would really care anyway?

Merely expressing a personal view.

The problem with that view is it rather suggests that you're not happy for two gay men to be "out in public"? I'm sure that isn't your point.

Ah, Brother Sanctamonicus Pontificus appears out of the fog to lead me to salvation. There isn't a problem with "that view" unless it's yours as in your eternal, divine right to tell me what I think or mean. Nothing new there obviously. I thought I'd done that? It's clear enough."It rather suggests" ? indicating any view that isn't yours is wrong even if it's one you made up? Try having an original thought. Get a grip, read the post and pass on. Nothing to see here.

You know what - the point about expressing opinions, especially using a medium such as the internet is you will have people question them.

If you are so set in your ways as to not want, what was a fairly gentle discussion about your view, then why bother posting it in the first place?

You also ignore my major contention - that the reason we have gay pride and the like is because such public expressions of homosexuality were not allowed up until fairly recent history and they want to celebrate that fact. Nobody is stopping you from having a parade about anything you like.

What next? Dogging in public. Maybe they could join the Montenegro fans making monkey chants while the crusaders encourage the buggerings by voluminously pissing into ever bigger pots!
There are limits. Well there are for me.

There are for everyone, but those limits will be different.

I have no issue with that - what issue I do have personally, is when people selectively apply those limits to different groups. You only need go out in Bolton on a Friday night to see all sorts of things that no doubt will stretch many people's limits. What I personally think is unacceptable is if you would tolerate a man and a woman doing something in public yet would not find two men doing the same acceptable.

Strangely enough, I agree.

I'd amend that point though, insofar as I'd actually encourage two women to 'stretch my limits' as it were...

[Montreal Wanderer]

There is nothing homophobic in that tweet.

If anyone should be offended it's the fella who's very existence is being disparaged.

I agree 100% - it is not homophobic. It was not a very original line but the chap to be offended would be Oliver Mundell.

[Montreal Wanderer]

To be fair, he's the mard prick trying to sue because the nasty lady went into print about the thing. If she'd just said it to all her friends who'd have given a toss?

Interesting that the Labour Party have cut the funding for her defence, wonder what their motivation is.

And the nasty lady went into print because the mard prick tweeted the joke.

If you put yourself in the public sphere you can't complain if people disagree or call you out in the public sphere. To then whine "libel" and still come out as the hero of the free-speech can't say no anymore is quite the conjuring trick, I'll grant him.

I know your libel laws are different and truth is a defence. Would the lady have to prove the chap was homophobic? On the basis of the tweet I read that would be difficult for her as it did not appear homophobic. Or is it not libelous to call someone homophobic, or a racist, etc.?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

To be fair, he's the mard prick trying to sue because the nasty lady went into print about the thing. If she'd just said it to all her friends who'd have given a toss?

Interesting that the Labour Party have cut the funding for her defence, wonder what their motivation is.

And the nasty lady went into print because the mard prick tweeted the joke.

If you put yourself in the public sphere you can't complain if people disagree or call you out in the public sphere. To then whine "libel" and still come out as the hero of the free-speech can't say no anymore is quite the conjuring trick, I'll grant him.

I know your libel laws are different and truth is a defence. Would the lady have to prove the chap was homophobic? On the basis of the tweet I read that would be difficult for her as it did not appear homophobic. Or is it not libelous to call someone homophobic, or a racist, etc.?

Is Truth not a defence in Canadia?