Nobody's saying that - this conversation has moved on from whether he should win or not. you should really bother to read the thread before commenting.

But that shouldn't be the reason to vote for him, same as it shouldn't be a reason to vote against him.

If he's talented, vote for him. If he ain't, vote for someone else.

Nobody's saying anyone should vote for someone because they might be gay. Dear lord I wish people would read the threads properly before commenting!

Well, maybe the thread shouldn't be dragged off topic, as it's bad netiquette and probably against guidelines!!

READ the thread title!!!!

The post you quoted didn't say anything like that

Indeed. I won't vote for Joe because he's gay. I'll vote for him because he's hot - though I'm not sure why one is more frivolous than the other...

But there is nothing wrong with identifying positively, with someone who you feel you have something in common with.

Frankly, I'm bored with this attitude many people have to gay people. ".

I find it genuinely offensive that the same people who'll scream that someone's sexuality doesn't matter will be the first to rush out to buy Heat magazine to see whose snogging who.

The inference was that positive discrimination is OK for some sections of the community, but not for other sections.

That was the inference if we're just making up stuff that we want to argue against.

Discrimination is wrong. Period. How can you be bored with that?

You then go on to say that you find it offensive that some people aren't bothered about people's sexual preferences but they are interested in who's snogging who.

Taking an interest in celebrity relationships is completely different to having an opinion on their sexual preferences! Can you seriously not see that?

I couldn't get that from the quote at all.

Not everyone who speculates on people's sexuality has an inclusive and genuine motive for doing it.

Still, sadly, and all too often, it is used, as some sort of attack - although this is hidden under pc attitudes. This works because in some sections of society there are still homophobic attitudes.

Context is all, perhaps - I'm happy with the one. I am distrustful of the other.

The point is, I'm still unconvinced why speculating that Olly is ploughing Stacey is any different to insinuating that Joe and someone else are in a same-sex relationship.

Yet, for some, there is a difference. Mention one rumour on here you'll have your thread closed, mention the other - nothing.

Beyond the issue of Joe or anyone else specifically, I'm still not understanding why mindless speculation is accepted in one respect but smothered in another.

Thinking someone might be gay is treated as if we're accusing people of a crime.

I think Joe is gay. But I don't see how that's any worse than thinking Olly is straight.

Would I get told off or chastised for speculating about Olly's relationship with another female contestant? I think not.

Yet if I was to say similar about two male contestants, suddenly I'd have overstepped a mark. I'm still not sure as to why.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but I think that there was a factor in the other speculation that was about age difference and something else, which may be what the problem was.

Are you sure Aaron?

Have you never experienced homophobia?


The problem seems to be that whilst as a broad and general rule these sorts of speculation should be fine - in a person by person case, in the climate we still have, they can be damaging to that person.

There are three broad camps (pardon the pun).

1. If I say someone is gay that's fine because there's nothing wrong with being gay, like there's nothing wrong with being straight. FINE

2. If I say someone is gay I am speculating about something that is their business and nothing to do with the subject in hand. And if it is it's up to them if they come out or not. (I acknowledge homophobia exists).

3. I am going to say someone is gay because I know that loads of people really don't like it, or it doesn't suit their view of this person, I am doing this to influence people not to vote for them. (I will hide this though, and pretend to be 1).

When it is brought up repeatedly on the eve of a very big competition, well, lets say I feel a bit suspicious.

Although of course, not all people who speculate about sexuality have ulterior motives, and it is sometimes hard to spot the difference.

Some people aren't going to like people that are gay, but I'd rather not keep everything hush-hush, so they can go on living blissfully in ignorance.

Ignorance needs to be confronted not placated.

This is the problem.

Who are we to 'sacrifice' anyone else to that 'cause' though?

We can fight ignorance with volunteers.

But clearly we can't as it's 2009 and we're still in this situation.

I can understand why people in the public eye don't want to come out, but at the end of the day, really grow some balls.

If a 16 year old kid living on a hostile council estate can manage it, TV celebrities and pop-stars can too.

I strongly believe that keeping sexuality hidden, fuels the biggots.

If somebody is in government and supports anti gay laws, I can understand the desire to out them. Not for an entertainer though. It really is absolutely none of your business if a person wants to keep their sexuality personal to them. People do not have a personal responsibility to confront others views, or act on behalf of a movement.

There is no need to keep talking about him being gay, we all know that he is gay but he will talk about it when he wants to.

I do not know about Joe's sexuality, so I know that that statement is factually incorrect.

An I strongly believe in individual and personal choice.

Not everyone is certain of their sexuality as a teenager anyway, and not everyone is brave, even if they are certain. People don't 'grow balls' by being forced into things.

If it isn't to be a discriminatory "no need to keep talking" then presumably no one should speculate if Olly is straight or if Stacey is going out with a man.

In reality however, the nature of the show and publicity around it relies and encourages discussion of lots of things, such as who dislikes who, who upset who, who gets on with who who fancies who etc etc.

How patronising to vote for someone just because they might be gay, or not.

If you love the ballads and are happy to sit through a whole concert of them then Joe is your guy, I prefer the all round entertainer and for me Olly really made the show last night.

Each to his own.

Yep - good post, not interested in what Joe or anyone else does in there privacy of there own home.

Hope he wins because he deserves it - nothing more.