On what grounds if he was though? Being an unfunny idiot isn't actually a crime so I'd be interested to know under what section he'd be charged.
The telecoms act I expect (whatever it is called) - there are laws in place to stop abusive calls and what used to be called 'poison pen letters' (when people wrote letters),
Galliano said far worse about the Jews and that Wintour women has welcomed him back into the fold lately. It's a hissy fit by Elton, no one will care in a few weeks.
Galliano said far worse about the Jews and that Wintour women has welcomed him back into the fold lately. It's a hissy fit by Elton, no one will care in a few weeks.
Had a prominent Jewish celebrity led a twitter boycott of because of what he said about Jews I'd guarantee nobody would call it "bullying" or a "hissy fit".
Indeed the way people use terms like hissy fit and drama queen is also quite telling. An attempt to dehumanise his emotions and response because of his sexuality. A 'real' man offended would be standing up for his family, whereas a homosexual doing is is throwing a 'hissy fit' and being a 'drama queen', right?
Why don't we all just snigger "ooh, get her!" under our breath to complete the set of "they're not like us and don't have emotions that we can't mock", eh?
Exactly. Maybe the poster I quoted would prefer to live as a stone age hunter/gatherer, but thankfully most people are willing to embrace unnatural ideas.
I see the world's luvvies are lining up to twitter how 'outraged' they are. As if most people care about them and their wet-leg liberal ways. They'll all join the boycott and swan around wearing wristbands until something new comes along. D&G are perfectly entitled to say what they think about 'unnatural babies'.
I thought all the homophobic religious nutjobs had left DS because it's been quiet recently. This thread sadly proves how wrong i was. For anyone to actually agree with the designers, well i feel sad for you...
I can't abide Elton John, if he really had any credit he would use his real name - is it Reg Dwight - or am I wrong. He is an annoying waste of time and never had any real musical talent until he met Bernie Taupin. Reg/Elton is a really pointless person.
I can't abide Elton John, if he really had any credit he would use his real name - is it Reg Dwight - or am I wrong. He is an annoying waste of time and never had any real musical talent until he met Bernie Taupin. Reg/Elton is a really pointless person.
Yes people not using their real names is disgraceful, 'Oldnbold'
I can't abide Elton John, if he really had any credit he would use his real name - is it Reg Dwight - or am I wrong. He is an annoying waste of time and never had any real musical talent until he met Bernie Taupin. Reg/Elton is a really pointless person.
What? What does his name have to do with anything.
I thought all the homophobic religious nutjobs had left DS because it's been quiet recently. This thread sadly proves how wrong i was. For anyone to actually agree with the designers, well i feel sad for you...
Why?
It was only until relatively recently that it even became possible.
Whatever did people do then? Would people before 1978 think it 'disgusting'? It was the way life designed itself to be. How can what is natural be disgusting and homophobic, and for the idea to only be held by religious nutjobs? I've even seen a comment by yet another celebrity pundit describing Dolce and Gabbana's opinions as vile.
Elton John apparently said "Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times".
What, so because Dolce and Gabbana's point of view isn't trendy and all the rage right now we have people jumping on the bandwagon to demonise them?
This is ridiculous. This is like a mob of people trying to force people into what they should think.
Dolce and Gabbana said themselves that they aren't judging people personally as individuals. You would think that people would say "Okay then, fair enough". But no, it appears that isn't good enough.
This is a subject in itself which lends itself to a fascinating discussion where all opinions can be shared and considered. But instead, people's behaviour has devolved into aggressive ranting at a new target to hate. Many people give credit to the value that a female mother and a male father as parents can bring to the development of a child. After all it's how we evolved as a species. It's normal, it's natural, there's nothing wrong with it. IVF isn't natural. It is synthetic. I'm not being vile to anyone or being disgusting when I say this. There is no hate towards anybody in my heart.
I think IVF is a godsend to parents who have been struggling for years to have a child together. I don't think it's a bad thing in itself. It can be a good thing and has been for many people.
And it's not the case that same sex parents can't bring up a child together. Many will have brought up happy children.
However, there is an argument that what Dolce and Gabbana believe is a valid one.
It's no less valid than believing that same sex parents can do a good job too.
In this day and age I think I understand what they mean. It does feel a bit too convenient and could lead down the path of designer babies, the haves and have nots, and there is a feeling that people may be starting to take these sciences for granted as if they are owed to them as a right. When it comes to the early days of a science or technology we're still experimenting on ourselves, and I think it's a good thing to take a cautioned and considered approach to some of the latest developments which are introduced to our culture.
To condemn somebody for having a point of view which is believed to be based solely on being 'dated', 'archaic', and not modern enough is an unintelligent way of approaching things I feel. And to do so in such a petty and aggressive manner is quite moronic. Ricky Martin's tweet springs to mind. And it certainly shouldn't be about who 'wins' the argument by getting the most online followers on your side, which is what seems to be going on.
You don't form opinions based on what is deemed to be trendy, modern, or popular, you form them based on rational thought and consideration.
And you certainly shouldn't be condemned because your opinion is deemed by many to be unpopular.
I think IVF is a potentially good thing. It has enhanced many people's lives. I think that many same sex parents are capable of bringing up a child with love and help them achieve an upbringing with a positive development. However I don't think it's a clear cut case of black and white, where either side is completely right or wrong. I do think that there are potential problems we could be setting ourselves up for in the future, both seen and yet unseen.
I'd much rather read an interesting discussion on the subject between people with all kinds of views to offer, rather than witness the petty childish online actions of Elton John, and in other cases the cynical reactions which inevitably follow of other celebrities jumping on the bandwagon all vying to try to say the most right on things to the public and curry favour with them. And what I find disgusting is reducing the subject to the encouragement of people to boycott Dolce and Gabbana.
That's just insane. Boycott a cause which is worthy if you feel the need to boycott anything. There's much more important things in the world to vent this kind of anger at.
You don't encourage people to boycott something just because you're angry because you don't happen to agree with something somebody said and want to see lots of people get on your side to make yourself feel better.
Dolce and Gabbanna didn't attack any one person. Yet so many people are jumping onboard with the mob to take potshots at them. I think that the manner of this kind of reaction is more of reflection of the nature of the people taking part in the attack than it is of Dolce and Gabbanna. I really do think that people are trying to stifle and discourage their right to free speech as opposed to simply disagreeing with them.
This has turned out to be a long post, but I'd just like to add one more thing. Dolce and Gabbanna made their comments in the context of an interview in a magazine where they presumably simply answered questions put to them. They didn't go online to create an argument out of it or attack anybody out of spite. I would also imagine that they didn't go out to attack children, but just used the term 'synthetic children' in a similar way to the term 'test tube babies' has been coined and used for decades which rarely makes anybody bat an eyelash.
I am anti IVF, synthetic children, clones, designer babies, 3 people DNA babies - the lot. All totally unnatural and we have given into greed and selfishness.
If you can't reproduce naturally then natural selection and evolution are being "bypassed" - We are developing our species so that it defies nature and the weak survive. This will do great damage to our species over time.
I disagree with a lot of medical research too.
I'm sorry that my existence offends you so much. I can only assume that if you become seriously ill, you will deny medical help and just hope for the best? Hopefully you're not one of the "weak" ones.
I understand that straights will get offended on behalf of gays regarding what D&G have stated. What I'm saying is that a straight person couldn't be as offended as a gay person, as it wouldn't be directly affecting them.
I'm not against IVF, though I know very little about it. All I know is that it is a way for a couple to conceive who can't by natural means. I would be against a procedure where you could literally "design" your own baby, I'd think that was wrong.
As I'm writing this, I'm seriously trying to work out how it could be that a straight person would be actually "offended" by this. Possibly annoyed, but no more than that....
I still think being "disgusted" is over reacting, sorry, it's just the only thing I reserve being disgusted about is crimes against children and animals. And those things are disgusting.
But not opinions.
I'm disgusted because my existence is being insulted. I'm not "synthetic". I'm very much real and I was created in an act of love. D & G's words were ridiculously idiotic.
I thought all the homophobic religious nutjobs had left DS because it's been quiet recently. This thread sadly proves how wrong i was. For anyone to actually agree with the designers, well i feel sad for you...
^ This
I'm amazed to step into this thread and see people who are even more moronic than average on here.
Sure, D&G had the right to say what they said, for those wittering on about the 'free speech' argument, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't be criticised for saying such daft and offensive things.
Looks like the real philistines are coming out of the woodwork on this one. Dull buggers.
I think a lot of people could do with learning what IVF is too. It has nothing to do with 'designer' babies and selecting particular cosmetic traits.
I think Elton John was using his right to free speech as well... isn't that how it works?
I think Elton John has a right to challenge what they said.
I don't think that D&G were actually attacking or targeting innocent kids as a lot of posters would like to believe.
They were making a general statement on what they believe to be true.
I think it's very immature of Elton John to enlist the help of FB/Twitter and start this ridiculous "boycott" and try and get everyone involved. What for?
When I go to the High St to buy my clothes, I really couldn't give an arse as to what the opinions are of the shop owners/sales assistants who serve me/sell me their clothes.
Elton John imo is making this into a huge unnecessary circus.
And I doubt that D&G are going to be much out of pocket by this anyway, probably by next week, it'll all be forgotten. And I hope it is.
Why?
It was only until relatively recently that it even became possible.
Whatever did people do then? Would people before 1978 think it 'disgusting'? It was the way life designed itself to be. How can what is natural be disgusting and homophobic, and for the idea to only be held by religious nutjobs? I've even seen a comment by yet another celebrity pundit describing Dolce and Gabbana's opinions as vile.
Elton John apparently said "Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times".
What, so because Dolce and Gabbana's point of view isn't trendy and all the rage right now we have people jumping on the bandwagon to demonise them?
This is ridiculous. This is like a mob of people trying to force people into what they should think.
Dolce and Gabbana said themselves that they aren't judging people personally as individuals. You would think that people would say "Okay then, fair enough". But no, it appears that isn't good enough.
This is a subject in itself which lends itself to a fascinating discussion where all opinions can be shared and considered. But instead, people's behaviour has devolved into aggressive ranting at a new target to hate. Many people give credit to the value that a female mother and a male father as parents can bring to the development of a child. After all it's how we evolved as a species. It's normal, it's natural, there's nothing wrong with it. IVF isn't natural. It is synthetic. I'm not being vile to anyone or being disgusting when I say this. There is no hate towards anybody in my heart.
I think IVF is a godsend to parents who have been struggling for years to have a child together. I don't think it's a bad thing in itself. It can be a good thing and has been for many people.
And it's not the case that same sex parents can't bring up a child together. Many will have brought up happy children.
However, there is an argument that what Dolce and Gabbana believe is a valid one.
It's no less valid than believing that same sex parents can do a good job too.
In this day and age I think I understand what they mean. It does feel a bit too convenient and could lead down the path of designer babies, the haves and have nots, and there is a feeling that people may be starting to take these sciences for granted as if they are owed to them as a right. When it comes to the early days of a science or technology we're still experimenting on ourselves, and I think it's a good thing to take a cautioned and considered approach to some of the latest developments which are introduced to our culture.
To condemn somebody for having a point of view which is believed to be based solely on being 'dated', 'archaic', and not modern enough is an unintelligent way of approaching things I feel. And to do so in such a petty and aggressive manner is quite moronic. Ricky Martin's tweet springs to mind. And it certainly shouldn't be about who 'wins' the argument by getting the most online followers on your side, which is what seems to be going on.
You don't form opinions based on what is deemed to be trendy, modern, or popular, you form them based on rational thought and consideration.
And you certainly shouldn't be condemned because your opinion is deemed by many to be unpopular.
I think IVF is a potentially good thing. It has enhanced many people's lives. I think that many same sex parents are capable of bringing up a child with love and help them achieve an upbringing with a positive development. However I don't think it's a clear cut case of black and white, where either side is completely right or wrong. I do think that there are potential problems we could be setting ourselves up for in the future, both seen and yet unseen.
I'd much rather read an interesting discussion on the subject between people with all kinds of views to offer, rather than witness the petty childish online actions of Elton John, and in other cases the cynical reactions which inevitably follow of other celebrities jumping on the bandwagon all vying to try to say the most right on things to the public and curry favour with them. And what I find disgusting is reducing the subject to the encouragement of people to boycott Dolce and Gabbana.
That's just insane. Boycott a cause which is worthy if you feel the need to boycott anything. There's much more important things in the world to vent this kind of anger at.
You don't encourage people to boycott something just because you're angry because you don't happen to agree with something somebody said and want to see lots of people get on your side to make yourself feel better.
Dolce and Gabbanna didn't attack any one person. Yet so many people are jumping onboard with the mob to take potshots at them. I think that the manner of this kind of reaction is more of reflection of the nature of the people taking part in the attack than it is of Dolce and Gabbanna. I really do think that people are trying to stifle and discourage their right to free speech as opposed to simply disagreeing with them.
This has turned out to be a long post, but I'd just like to add one more thing. Dolce and Gabbanna made their comments in the context of an interview in a magazine where they presumably simply answered questions put to them. They didn't go online to create an argument out of it or attack anybody out of spite. I would also imagine that they didn't go out to attack children, but just used the term 'synthetic children' in a similar way to the term 'test tube babies' has been coined and used for decades which rarely makes anybody bat an eyelash.
So glad you posted, and I hope every poster who's posted on this thread reads this, especially those that think they are "disgusted" by someone elses opinions and that D&G are "vile".
I see the world's luvvies are lining up to twitter how 'outraged' they are. As if most people care about them and their wet-leg liberal ways. They'll all join the boycott and swan around wearing wristbands until something new comes along. D&G are perfectly entitled to say what they think about 'unnatural babies'.
Yes, and others are perfectly entitled to criticise them or call for a boycott. Why do people keep missing this point?
I can't abide Elton John, if he really had any credit he would use his real name - is it Reg Dwight - or am I wrong. He is an annoying waste of time and never had any real musical talent until he met Bernie Taupin. Reg/Elton is a really pointless person.
I agree with this and even moreso with the point about the media driven agenda that everyone has to bow down to either sooner or later......all debate stifled as much as possible and everyone falling into line or being forced into silence.Not good.
You can disagree with them a million percent but please let them have an opinion.....nothing particularly offensive in what they said at all IMO.
Except of course for calling kids "synthetic". And no one is saying they should be barred from having an opinion. No one is being "forced into silence". Don't be such a drama queen!
Why?
It was only until relatively recently that it even became possible.
Whatever did people do then? Would people before 1978 think it 'disgusting'? It was the way life designed itself to be. How can what is natural be disgusting and homophobic, and for the idea to only be held by religious nutjobs? I've even seen a comment by yet another celebrity pundit describing Dolce and Gabbana's opinions as vile.
It's disgusting that these two designers think that people who can't have children naturally shouldn't have children by artificial means.
I can't abide Elton John, if he really had any credit he would use his real name - is it Reg Dwight - or am I wrong. He is an annoying waste of time and never had any real musical talent until he met Bernie Taupin. Reg/Elton is a really pointless person.
You could say the same about:
Eminem
Snoop Dogg
I'm sure there's more singers/rappers that don't use their real name.
Galliano said far worse about the Jews and that Wintour women has welcomed him back into the fold lately. It's a hissy fit by Elton, no one will care in a few weeks.
Personally I don't care what he says NOW, and never have done.
My take on IVF is that it is a Godsend to couples who are experiencing difficulty conceiving naturally, and if a couple get pregnant by using it, it's a good thing.
I don't think that the average person realises how much of a heartache it must be to couples that yearn for a baby, and it never seems to happen.
A lot of people jump through hoops to avoid pregnancy, and end up praying every month, my ex wife would be a week late if I stroked her face.
As for same sex couples having a child/children, I'm still not happy about that, the jury is still out, probably because I'm a lot older than the average FM, and no doubt would be considered a dinosaur by others on the forum.
Why?
It was only until relatively recently that it even became possible.
Whatever did people do then? Would people before 1978 think it 'disgusting'? It was the way life designed itself to be. How can what is natural be disgusting and homophobic, and for the idea to only be held by religious nutjobs? I've even seen a comment by yet another celebrity pundit describing Dolce and Gabbana's opinions as vile.
Elton John apparently said "Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times".
What, so because Dolce and Gabbana's point of view isn't trendy and all the rage right now we have people jumping on the bandwagon to demonise them?
This is ridiculous. This is like a mob of people trying to force people into what they should think.
Dolce and Gabbana said themselves that they aren't judging people personally as individuals. You would think that people would say "Okay then, fair enough". But no, it appears that isn't good enough.
This is a subject in itself which lends itself to a fascinating discussion where all opinions can be shared and considered. But instead, people's behaviour has devolved into aggressive ranting at a new target to hate. Many people give credit to the value that a female mother and a male father as parents can bring to the development of a child. After all it's how we evolved as a species. It's normal, it's natural, there's nothing wrong with it. IVF isn't natural. It is synthetic. I'm not being vile to anyone or being disgusting when I say this. There is no hate towards anybody in my heart.
I think IVF is a godsend to parents who have been struggling for years to have a child together. I don't think it's a bad thing in itself. It can be a good thing and has been for many people.
And it's not the case that same sex parents can't bring up a child together. Many will have brought up happy children.
However, there is an argument that what Dolce and Gabbana believe is a valid one.
It's no less valid than believing that same sex parents can do a good job too.
In this day and age I think I understand what they mean. It does feel a bit too convenient and could lead down the path of designer babies, the haves and have nots, and there is a feeling that people may be starting to take these sciences for granted as if they are owed to them as a right. When it comes to the early days of a science or technology we're still experimenting on ourselves, and I think it's a good thing to take a cautioned and considered approach to some of the latest developments which are introduced to our culture.
To condemn somebody for having a point of view which is believed to be based solely on being 'dated', 'archaic', and not modern enough is an unintelligent way of approaching things I feel. And to do so in such a petty and aggressive manner is quite moronic. Ricky Martin's tweet springs to mind. And it certainly shouldn't be about who 'wins' the argument by getting the most online followers on your side, which is what seems to be going on.
You don't form opinions based on what is deemed to be trendy, modern, or popular, you form them based on rational thought and consideration.
And you certainly shouldn't be condemned because your opinion is deemed by many to be unpopular.
I think IVF is a potentially good thing. It has enhanced many people's lives. I think that many same sex parents are capable of bringing up a child with love and help them achieve an upbringing with a positive development. However I don't think it's a clear cut case of black and white, where either side is completely right or wrong. I do think that there are potential problems we could be setting ourselves up for in the future, both seen and yet unseen.
I'd much rather read an interesting discussion on the subject between people with all kinds of views to offer, rather than witness the petty childish online actions of Elton John, and in other cases the cynical reactions which inevitably follow of other celebrities jumping on the bandwagon all vying to try to say the most right on things to the public and curry favour with them. And what I find disgusting is reducing the subject to the encouragement of people to boycott Dolce and Gabbana.
That's just insane. Boycott a cause which is worthy if you feel the need to boycott anything. There's much more important things in the world to vent this kind of anger at.
You don't encourage people to boycott something just because you're angry because you don't happen to agree with something somebody said and want to see lots of people get on your side to make yourself feel better.
Dolce and Gabbanna didn't attack any one person. Yet so many people are jumping onboard with the mob to take potshots at them. I think that the manner of this kind of reaction is more of reflection of the nature of the people taking part in the attack than it is of Dolce and Gabbanna. I really do think that people are trying to stifle and discourage their right to free speech as opposed to simply disagreeing with them.
This has turned out to be a long post, but I'd just like to add one more thing. Dolce and Gabbanna made their comments in the context of an interview in a magazine where they presumably simply answered questions put to them. They didn't go online to create an argument out of it or attack anybody out of spite. I would also imagine that they didn't go out to attack children, but just used the term 'synthetic children' in a similar way to the term 'test tube babies' has been coined and used for decades which rarely makes anybody bat an eyelash.
Based on what? That other famous people (and plenty of IVF parents who are not famous) are expressing their views? How does that 'stifle the debate' (a debate that is ongoing, so not stifled at all). What are you saying here... that those who disagree should say nothing? Or that only a few people should speak up and after that no-one else should say anything?
D&G are public figures who made statements in a public forum. A lot of people disagree with their statements and they have every right to say so as vociferously as they please. D&G can then respond back. They made the choice to raise the issue and give their views on it, so they have to accept that others might challenge them.
Why?
It was only until relatively recently that it even became possible.
Whatever did people do then? Would people before 1978 think it 'disgusting'? It was the way life designed itself to be. How can what is natural be disgusting and homophobic, and for the idea to only be held by religious nutjobs? I've even seen a comment by yet another celebrity pundit describing Dolce and Gabbana's opinions as vile.
Elton John apparently said "Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times".
What, so because Dolce and Gabbana's point of view isn't trendy and all the rage right now we have people jumping on the bandwagon to demonise them?
This is ridiculous. This is like a mob of people trying to force people into what they should think.
Dolce and Gabbana said themselves that they aren't judging people personally as individuals. You would think that people would say "Okay then, fair enough". But no, it appears that isn't good enough.
This is a subject in itself which lends itself to a fascinating discussion where all opinions can be shared and considered. But instead, people's behaviour has devolved into aggressive ranting at a new target to hate. Many people give credit to the value that a female mother and a male father as parents can bring to the development of a child. After all it's how we evolved as a species. It's normal, it's natural, there's nothing wrong with it. IVF isn't natural. It is synthetic. I'm not being vile to anyone or being disgusting when I say this. There is no hate towards anybody in my heart.
I think IVF is a godsend to parents who have been struggling for years to have a child together. I don't think it's a bad thing in itself. It can be a good thing and has been for many people.
And it's not the case that same sex parents can't bring up a child together. Many will have brought up happy children.
However, there is an argument that what Dolce and Gabbana believe is a valid one.
It's no less valid than believing that same sex parents can do a good job too.
In this day and age I think I understand what they mean. It does feel a bit too convenient and could lead down the path of designer babies, the haves and have nots, and there is a feeling that people may be starting to take these sciences for granted as if they are owed to them as a right. When it comes to the early days of a science or technology we're still experimenting on ourselves, and I think it's a good thing to take a cautioned and considered approach to some of the latest developments which are introduced to our culture.
To condemn somebody for having a point of view which is believed to be based solely on being 'dated', 'archaic', and not modern enough is an unintelligent way of approaching things I feel. And to do so in such a petty and aggressive manner is quite moronic. Ricky Martin's tweet springs to mind. And it certainly shouldn't be about who 'wins' the argument by getting the most online followers on your side, which is what seems to be going on.
You don't form opinions based on what is deemed to be trendy, modern, or popular, you form them based on rational thought and consideration.
And you certainly shouldn't be condemned because your opinion is deemed by many to be unpopular.
I think IVF is a potentially good thing. It has enhanced many people's lives. I think that many same sex parents are capable of bringing up a child with love and help them achieve an upbringing with a positive development. However I don't think it's a clear cut case of black and white, where either side is completely right or wrong. I do think that there are potential problems we could be setting ourselves up for in the future, both seen and yet unseen.
I'd much rather read an interesting discussion on the subject between people with all kinds of views to offer, rather than witness the petty childish online actions of Elton John, and in other cases the cynical reactions which inevitably follow of other celebrities jumping on the bandwagon all vying to try to say the most right on things to the public and curry favour with them. And what I find disgusting is reducing the subject to the encouragement of people to boycott Dolce and Gabbana.
That's just insane. Boycott a cause which is worthy if you feel the need to boycott anything. There's much more important things in the world to vent this kind of anger at.
You don't encourage people to boycott something just because you're angry because you don't happen to agree with something somebody said and want to see lots of people get on your side to make yourself feel better.
Dolce and Gabbanna didn't attack any one person. Yet so many people are jumping onboard with the mob to take potshots at them. I think that the manner of this kind of reaction is more of reflection of the nature of the people taking part in the attack than it is of Dolce and Gabbanna. I really do think that people are trying to stifle and discourage their right to free speech as opposed to simply disagreeing with them.
This has turned out to be a long post, but I'd just like to add one more thing. Dolce and Gabbanna made their comments in the context of an interview in a magazine where they presumably simply answered questions put to them. They didn't go online to create an argument out of it or attack anybody out of spite. I would also imagine that they didn't go out to attack children, but just used the term 'synthetic children' in a similar way to the term 'test tube babies' has been coined and used for decades which rarely makes anybody bat an eyelash.
For me, you talk the most sense on this thread, though i'm sure many won't agree with you, but i don't think many have given the subject as much thought as you have. As a gay man from the same generation as the two italians, i can understand where they are coming from, i think (however crassly that opinion was put) I would have loved kids, me and my partner of 15 years both discussed it often, and yet were both of differing opinions, I just couldn't get my head around the idea of bringing up a kid without a "mum" does that make me a "self loathing homophobe" or perhaps just a product of my generation, even though i have more friends my age group who have no issue with it, i do have friends who feel the same way as me. We spent out teens and 20's and early 30's never even giving it a moments thought, because it just wasn't a option, so when it became a option, is it little wonder that we aren't all one big homogonised group, all thinking the same way! The few gay friends i have who are bringing up kids , are wonderful parents and their (young) kids are very happy and nothing i see in them suggests they won't always be, but i still feel the way i do and my partner feels the way he does. I think those young gay men who were born later than me have grown up more open of the notion two gay dads will feel differently and that would make sense. I in no way would want to take a step back in time or deny anyone the right to go down the road of having kids and i don't think dolce and gabbanna were saying that either, im sure they are just two designers who were asked to comment on something, and did rather clumsily , but to be fair, i don't suppose outside of fashion many people have been interested in what these two guys think. I do think that Elton is making more out of this than he needs to, it wasn't that long ago when he was deep in the closet himself, so he hasn't always been on the same page as the rest of us that were out there campaigning for equality in a whole range of lgbt issues.Of course Elton is entitled to his opinion and right to question their terminology "synthetic" , but i think he really making this about himself, when it really shouldn't be.
Comments
The telecoms act I expect (whatever it is called) - there are laws in place to stop abusive calls and what used to be called 'poison pen letters' (when people wrote letters),
Had a prominent Jewish celebrity led a twitter boycott of because of what he said about Jews I'd guarantee nobody would call it "bullying" or a "hissy fit".
Indeed the way people use terms like hissy fit and drama queen is also quite telling. An attempt to dehumanise his emotions and response because of his sexuality. A 'real' man offended would be standing up for his family, whereas a homosexual doing is is throwing a 'hissy fit' and being a 'drama queen', right?
Why don't we all just snigger "ooh, get her!" under our breath to complete the set of "they're not like us and don't have emotions that we can't mock", eh?
Wouldn't this be an example of extrinsic rather than intrinsic knowledge? Surely this is learnt skill from watching others?
Yes people not using their real names is disgraceful, 'Oldnbold'
What?
Why?
It was only until relatively recently that it even became possible.
Whatever did people do then? Would people before 1978 think it 'disgusting'? It was the way life designed itself to be. How can what is natural be disgusting and homophobic, and for the idea to only be held by religious nutjobs? I've even seen a comment by yet another celebrity pundit describing Dolce and Gabbana's opinions as vile.
Elton John apparently said "Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times".
What, so because Dolce and Gabbana's point of view isn't trendy and all the rage right now we have people jumping on the bandwagon to demonise them?
This is ridiculous. This is like a mob of people trying to force people into what they should think.
Dolce and Gabbana said themselves that they aren't judging people personally as individuals. You would think that people would say "Okay then, fair enough". But no, it appears that isn't good enough.
This is a subject in itself which lends itself to a fascinating discussion where all opinions can be shared and considered. But instead, people's behaviour has devolved into aggressive ranting at a new target to hate. Many people give credit to the value that a female mother and a male father as parents can bring to the development of a child. After all it's how we evolved as a species. It's normal, it's natural, there's nothing wrong with it. IVF isn't natural. It is synthetic. I'm not being vile to anyone or being disgusting when I say this. There is no hate towards anybody in my heart.
I think IVF is a godsend to parents who have been struggling for years to have a child together. I don't think it's a bad thing in itself. It can be a good thing and has been for many people.
And it's not the case that same sex parents can't bring up a child together. Many will have brought up happy children.
However, there is an argument that what Dolce and Gabbana believe is a valid one.
It's no less valid than believing that same sex parents can do a good job too.
In this day and age I think I understand what they mean. It does feel a bit too convenient and could lead down the path of designer babies, the haves and have nots, and there is a feeling that people may be starting to take these sciences for granted as if they are owed to them as a right. When it comes to the early days of a science or technology we're still experimenting on ourselves, and I think it's a good thing to take a cautioned and considered approach to some of the latest developments which are introduced to our culture.
To condemn somebody for having a point of view which is believed to be based solely on being 'dated', 'archaic', and not modern enough is an unintelligent way of approaching things I feel. And to do so in such a petty and aggressive manner is quite moronic. Ricky Martin's tweet springs to mind. And it certainly shouldn't be about who 'wins' the argument by getting the most online followers on your side, which is what seems to be going on.
You don't form opinions based on what is deemed to be trendy, modern, or popular, you form them based on rational thought and consideration.
And you certainly shouldn't be condemned because your opinion is deemed by many to be unpopular.
I think IVF is a potentially good thing. It has enhanced many people's lives. I think that many same sex parents are capable of bringing up a child with love and help them achieve an upbringing with a positive development. However I don't think it's a clear cut case of black and white, where either side is completely right or wrong. I do think that there are potential problems we could be setting ourselves up for in the future, both seen and yet unseen.
I'd much rather read an interesting discussion on the subject between people with all kinds of views to offer, rather than witness the petty childish online actions of Elton John, and in other cases the cynical reactions which inevitably follow of other celebrities jumping on the bandwagon all vying to try to say the most right on things to the public and curry favour with them. And what I find disgusting is reducing the subject to the encouragement of people to boycott Dolce and Gabbana.
That's just insane. Boycott a cause which is worthy if you feel the need to boycott anything. There's much more important things in the world to vent this kind of anger at.
You don't encourage people to boycott something just because you're angry because you don't happen to agree with something somebody said and want to see lots of people get on your side to make yourself feel better.
Dolce and Gabbanna didn't attack any one person. Yet so many people are jumping onboard with the mob to take potshots at them. I think that the manner of this kind of reaction is more of reflection of the nature of the people taking part in the attack than it is of Dolce and Gabbanna. I really do think that people are trying to stifle and discourage their right to free speech as opposed to simply disagreeing with them.
This has turned out to be a long post, but I'd just like to add one more thing. Dolce and Gabbanna made their comments in the context of an interview in a magazine where they presumably simply answered questions put to them. They didn't go online to create an argument out of it or attack anybody out of spite. I would also imagine that they didn't go out to attack children, but just used the term 'synthetic children' in a similar way to the term 'test tube babies' has been coined and used for decades which rarely makes anybody bat an eyelash.
There is nothing I could possibly say to follow that. I will nod and agree wisely
I'm sorry that my existence offends you so much. I can only assume that if you become seriously ill, you will deny medical help and just hope for the best? Hopefully you're not one of the "weak" ones.
I'm disgusted because my existence is being insulted. I'm not "synthetic". I'm very much real and I was created in an act of love. D & G's words were ridiculously idiotic.
^ This
I'm amazed to step into this thread and see people who are even more moronic than average on here.
Sure, D&G had the right to say what they said, for those wittering on about the 'free speech' argument, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't be criticised for saying such daft and offensive things.
Looks like the real philistines are coming out of the woodwork on this one. Dull buggers.
I think a lot of people could do with learning what IVF is too. It has nothing to do with 'designer' babies and selecting particular cosmetic traits.
I don't think that D&G were actually attacking or targeting innocent kids as a lot of posters would like to believe.
They were making a general statement on what they believe to be true.
I think it's very immature of Elton John to enlist the help of FB/Twitter and start this ridiculous "boycott" and try and get everyone involved. What for?
When I go to the High St to buy my clothes, I really couldn't give an arse as to what the opinions are of the shop owners/sales assistants who serve me/sell me their clothes.
Elton John imo is making this into a huge unnecessary circus.
And I doubt that D&G are going to be much out of pocket by this anyway, probably by next week, it'll all be forgotten. And I hope it is.
Yes, and others are perfectly entitled to criticise them or call for a boycott. Why do people keep missing this point?
And that was a completely pointless post!
Except of course for calling kids "synthetic". And no one is saying they should be barred from having an opinion. No one is being "forced into silence". Don't be such a drama queen!
It's disgusting that these two designers think that people who can't have children naturally shouldn't have children by artificial means.
And of course no one has said that what is natural is disgusting. It's only their views and the way they expressed them that have been criticised.
You could say the same about:
Eminem
Snoop Dogg
I'm sure there's more singers/rappers that don't use their real name.
Personally I don't care what he says NOW, and never have done.
My take on IVF is that it is a Godsend to couples who are experiencing difficulty conceiving naturally, and if a couple get pregnant by using it, it's a good thing.
I don't think that the average person realises how much of a heartache it must be to couples that yearn for a baby, and it never seems to happen.
A lot of people jump through hoops to avoid pregnancy, and end up praying every month, my ex wife would be a week late if I stroked her face.
As for same sex couples having a child/children, I'm still not happy about that, the jury is still out, probably because I'm a lot older than the average FM, and no doubt would be considered a dinosaur by others on the forum.
Based on what? That other famous people (and plenty of IVF parents who are not famous) are expressing their views? How does that 'stifle the debate' (a debate that is ongoing, so not stifled at all). What are you saying here... that those who disagree should say nothing? Or that only a few people should speak up and after that no-one else should say anything?
D&G are public figures who made statements in a public forum. A lot of people disagree with their statements and they have every right to say so as vociferously as they please. D&G can then respond back. They made the choice to raise the issue and give their views on it, so they have to accept that others might challenge them.
For me, you talk the most sense on this thread, though i'm sure many won't agree with you, but i don't think many have given the subject as much thought as you have. As a gay man from the same generation as the two italians, i can understand where they are coming from, i think (however crassly that opinion was put) I would have loved kids, me and my partner of 15 years both discussed it often, and yet were both of differing opinions, I just couldn't get my head around the idea of bringing up a kid without a "mum" does that make me a "self loathing homophobe" or perhaps just a product of my generation, even though i have more friends my age group who have no issue with it, i do have friends who feel the same way as me. We spent out teens and 20's and early 30's never even giving it a moments thought, because it just wasn't a option, so when it became a option, is it little wonder that we aren't all one big homogonised group, all thinking the same way! The few gay friends i have who are bringing up kids , are wonderful parents and their (young) kids are very happy and nothing i see in them suggests they won't always be, but i still feel the way i do and my partner feels the way he does. I think those young gay men who were born later than me have grown up more open of the notion two gay dads will feel differently and that would make sense. I in no way would want to take a step back in time or deny anyone the right to go down the road of having kids and i don't think dolce and gabbanna were saying that either, im sure they are just two designers who were asked to comment on something, and did rather clumsily , but to be fair, i don't suppose outside of fashion many people have been interested in what these two guys think. I do think that Elton is making more out of this than he needs to, it wasn't that long ago when he was deep in the closet himself, so he hasn't always been on the same page as the rest of us that were out there campaigning for equality in a whole range of lgbt issues.Of course Elton is entitled to his opinion and right to question their terminology "synthetic" , but i think he really making this about himself, when it really shouldn't be.