• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • General Discussion Forums
  • General Discussion
Why are Gay campaigners saying George Michael should have come out as Gay years ago
<<
<
3 of 3
>>
>
jjwales
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by Trulytrue:
“Very well said. There is no need to "come out" sooner that is accepted the better.”

If you don't "come out" even in a small way (such as telling your friends or family), you're denying your true self. Which can't be healthy. In any case the thread title is misleading.
stud u like
28-12-2016
Some people met him at "Heaven".
What name??
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by jjwales:
“If you don't "come out" even in a small way (such as telling your friends or family), you're denying your true self. Which can't be healthy. In any case the thread title is misleading.”

But that doesn't apply to George Michael who was out to friends and going to gay clubs before he got famous and was very camp in the early days. So what is being talked about her is making your private life public property, not being comfortable with who you are which he seems to have been.
jjwales
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by What name??:
“But that doesn't apply to George Michael who was out to friends and going to gay clubs before he got famous and was very camp in the early days. So what is being talked about her is making your private life public property, not being comfortable with who you are which he seems to have been.”

OK, but AFAIK no one has criticised George Michael for not coming out publicly sooner.
benjamini
28-12-2016
Perhaps if he had "come out" publicly it would have been a great deal better than the way he was outed which ultimately must have been far more shocking and painful for his family.
Let's face it he wasn't particularly discreet. He was a risk taker, a hedonist and indiscreet and it was inevitable really. This is not a criticism, just a fact .
What name??
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by jjwales:
“ You may think he went about it the wrong way, but that doesn't make him racist.”

The way he went about it was in a racist manner and that does make you a racist.

The campaign was also based on racist assumptions that black people are more influenced by music, much like the anti-rap movement under the Reagans, it made the assumption that if black people see or hear violence that they are going to act it out whereas white people do not.

He failed to understand that some forms of music portray social issues and that can be positive for discussion. James Cagney films don't cause crime, nor do horror movies spark of serial killers, nor does the Fairytale of New York encourage domestic violence and dancehall music doesn't cause homophobia. It shows it up. Only racist stereotypes makes people acknowledge the first parts of the above sentence but get befuddled over the last one and try to explain why it is different.

Quote:
“And while Jamaica may not be the worst place in the world, it is certainly an extremely homophobic country.”

Every country is homophobic and Jamaica is more homophobic than the UK. It is too homophobic, but it's not even close to being the most homophobic in the Caribbean much less the world. Talking about an issue doesn't mean it exists more. Just like the fact that paedophilia is now openly discussed in the UK doesn't mean that it is happening more and is actually a sign that it is a social issue that is being tackled.

Gay people were actually imprisoned in Cuba and gay cruises were banned Barbados who of course have harsher anti gay laws. The same cruise that went to Jamaica instead and had no issues... That is because Jamaica is a regular party island for american gay tourism. That's one of the things that get the homophobes upset an upset by the visible flaunting of such hedonism. Of course you wouldn't know that if all you know about the place is the stereotypes built by PT and his cohorts.

Jamaica has a homophobic law which means that gay people can be harassed and targeted but which is not brought as far as prosecution. It should be repealed. It is unjust to have it on the books. However, the anti-Jamaican hate music campaign which was an attack on the country itself, an important part of it's revenue and did politicize the issue lead to the equivalent of the conservative party there adding homophobia to mainstream politics to appeal to family values, protecting youth and country etc and probably put that back by decades.

So who exactly was PT's campaign for, if not himself? What did it achieve? And was it ever meant to achieve anything for gay Jamaicans or black gay people in the UK? If it was wouldn't it have been formulated a bit differently?
Dotheboyshall
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“Not really. Even when he was open about being gay he still did amazingly reckless things.”

Was that a result of his earlier hiding of his homosexuality, behaviour patterns are hard to change.
jjwales
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by What name??:
“The way he went about it was in a racist manner and that does make you a racist.

The campaign was also based on racist assumptions that black people are more influenced by music, much like the anti-rap movement under the Reagans, it made the assumption that if black people see or hear violence that they are going to act it out whereas white people do not.”

I think that is your assumption about PT rather than PT's assumption about black people. If he was truly racist, surely he wouldn't have campaigned strongly against apartheid? Perhaps the worst that could be said about him would be that he doesn't understand Jamaican culture, if that's what you think the problem is.

Quote:
“He failed to understand that some forms of music portray social issues and that can be positive for discussion. James Cagney films don't cause crime, nor do horror movies spark of serial killers, nor does the Fairytale of New York encourage domestic violence and dancehall music doesn't cause homophobia. It shows it up.”

Are you saying that dancehall music actually encourages a more positive attitude towards LGBT people?

Quote:
“So who exactly was PT's campaign for, if not himself? What did it achieve?”

Clearly it was a campaign against homophobia, and sent the message that murder music and musicians are not welcome in the UK.
Cryolemon
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by PoppySeed:
“Peter Tatchell is such a bore I don't think I've ever come across a gay man who is so defined by his sexuality, it's like there's no other aspect to him.”

This. Tatchell is odious, and does more to harm LGBT rights than he does to help.
jjwales
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by Cryolemon:
“This. Tatchell is odious, and does more to harm LGBT rights than he does to help.”

What is so odious about him, and how exactly has he harmed gay rights? And as I pointed out to PoppySeed, he is not entirely defined by his sexuality. He has campaigned on many types of human rights, not just the LGBT variety.
vauxhall1964
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by PoppySeed:
“Peter Tatchell is such a bore I don't think I've ever come across a gay man who is so defined by his sexuality, it's like there's no other aspect to him.”

what nonsense. He's famous for his activism around human rights in general, the Iraq War, Mugabe's reign of terror in ZImbabwe ... to name a few.
jjwales
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by vauxhall1964:
“what nonsense. He's famous for his activism around human rights in general, the Iraq War, Mugabe's reign of terror in ZImbabwe ... to name a few.”

Indeed. It's rather sad that the thread
a) was based on a falsehood; and
b) has turned into a Tatchell hatefest.
D_Mcd4
28-12-2016
I think he understands very well. He had to remain quiet about his sexuality during the Bermondsey by election. Didn't stop Simon Hughs (now there's an irony) whipping up so much hate against him for being gay, that Tatchell was attacked and got death threats.
What name??
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by jjwales:
“Clearly it was a campaign against homophobia, and sent the message that murder music and musicians are not welcome in the UK.”

Homophobia against whom? There has never been a problem of violent homophobia among the British-Jamaican community much less one linked to these concerts. If the music was inciting violence where were the violent crimes? Meanwhile of course there are some concerts linked to violent homophobia but those would be far right bands... What problem exactly was he tackling that got solved here?

People still listen to the music if they want to of course, it is just that dance-hall has become more underground. The artists lost revenue but continued being popular and recording. The law in Jamaica didn't change, in fact it became more politically difficult to change it. The campaign did nothing for gay people within Jamaica even though PT originally claimed this was the aim. So what was the campaign against homophobia about and what message did it really send to black people apart from the fact that they are disproportionately targeted and aren't welcome in the UK?
What name??
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by jjwales:
“I think that is your assumption about PT rather than PT's assumption about black people. If he was truly racist, surely he wouldn't have campaigned strongly against apartheid?”

Nothing to do with it. There are variations and degrees of racism. Just because someone doesn't support apartheid doesn't mean they act or feel that all races are equal and should be treated so. Nor does it mean that they don't place race at the bottom of their pile of equality issues and should be subordinate to other "more important" issues.
Wee Tinkers
28-12-2016
When I saw the thread title I thought how insensitive, the campaigners need to mind their own but when I read the article it wasn't quite like that.

He wasn't critical of George at all. He described the feeling about homosexuality and AIDS at that time - the Gay Plague - and how, given that, he understood why George chose not to come out.

He did mention that had George come out at that time it may well have helped the situation somewhat but he did make it clear that he absolutely understood why George didn't.
jjwales
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by What name??:
“Homophobia against whom? There has never been a problem of violent homophobia among the British-Jamaican community much less one linked to these concerts. Meanwhile of course there are some concerts linked to violent homophobia but those would be far right bands... What problem exactly was he tackling that got solved here?

People still listen to the music if they want to of course, it is just that dance-hall has become more underground. The artists lost revenue but continued being popular and recording. The law in Jamaica didn't change, in fact it became more politically difficult to change it. The campaign did nothing for gay people within Jamaica even though PT originally claimed this was the aim. So what was the campaign against homophobia about and what message did it really send to black people apart from the fact that they are disproportionately targeted and aren't welcome in the UK?”

The campaign against homophobia was just that. If it didn't help gay people in Jamaica that's unfortunate but it wasn't for the lack of trying, and I'm sure they realise that "murder music" artists weren't being targetted because they were black.
D_Mcd4
28-12-2016
He's a racist for not liking music that talks about murdering gays? I heard him called an islamaphobe before for not liking how some countries with Sharia law murder gays, but the racist thing is a new one!

I don't agree with some of his more left wing views but I don't see him as a racist.
jjwales
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by What name??:
“Nothing to do with it. There are variations and degrees of racism. Just because someone doesn't support apartheid doesn't mean they act or feel that all races are equal and should be treated so. Nor does it mean that they don't place race at the bottom of their pile of equality issues and should be subordinate to other "more important" issues.”

I don't think you've shown that PT is in any way racist. That's the last thing I'd expect of him. If he's gone about things the wrong way, as you suggest, I'm sure it's not for any racist reason.
What name??
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by jjwales:
“The campaign against homophobia was just that..”

So Brexit means Brexit aka you have no clue about what the campaign actual aim was apart from targeting black artists?

For what reason were they targeted if not for being black since I've already pointed out that there was no actual murder or violence associated with the performance of the artists. What was the problem that this "free speech activist" was as protesting?

If it wasn't about tackling homophobia within Jamaica which it obviously wasn't. And it wasn't about a problem with black on gay violence in the UK which has never been a significant problem who was being harmed by this music which he claimed was inciting violence? And where was the violence that it incited?

Or could it have been another of PT's self promotion campaigns which he knew would take off becasue of the racist stereotypes and tropes he played on regarding about black cultures?
jjwales
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by What name??:
“So Brexit means Brexit aka you have no clue about what the campaign actual aim was apart from targeting black artists?”

But it didn't target black artists. It targetted artists who promote murder music and who just happen to be black. The aim of the campaign was presumably to keep these homophobic artists out of the UK.

Quote:
“For what reason were they targeted if not for being black since I've already pointed out that there was no actual murder or violence associated with the performance of the artists. What was the problem that this "free speech activist" was as protesting?”

The problem was homophobic violence and the promotion of it through murder music.
What name??
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by D_Mcd4:
“He's a racist for not liking music that talks about murdering gays?”

No he is racist for having the artists banned from the UK, for protesting the Mobos, for playing on stereotypes about black people being more inciteable to violence by music ie less rational and for not listening to black gay activists when this was pointed out and of course when this criticism was pointed out to him for pretending it was about being called racist for not liking a particular kind of music rather than using white privilege to persecute those that play it.
What name??
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by jjwales:
“But it didn't target black artists. It targetted artists who promote murder music and who just happen to be black. The aim of the campaign was presumably to keep these homophobic artists out of the UK.

The problem was homophobic violence and the promotion of it through murder music.”

But there was never an actual problem of homophobic violence associated with dancehall concerts in the first place. There never has been. None. If you think there is then show be the stats and where this has ever happened please.

This is no more likely to occur than people leave a gangster movie with an itch to start a life of crime or Tom Jones inciting someone to misogyny by singing Delilah. In this case where were the hordes of black people incited to lynch gay people...? What's really pathetic is that there wasn't even a real issue to begin with but this country is so racist that people assume there was one on the word of one malicious activist with a platform.

And no it didn't just target artists who promote murder music, he also targeted venues that hosted black music and award ceremonies. He has campaigned against other artists some of whom were white. Those campaigns didn't take off because they couldn't use the same stereotypes and prejudices to successfully incite a movement against them. And people didn't buy into the "murder music" label like they would against black victims of this targeting. When it came to the Pogues and Eminem people realized how ridiculous the claims were but when it came to dance hall artists their own prejudices stopped them from viewing the issue sensibly just like PT's did.
anne_666
28-12-2016
Originally Posted by owen10:
“I heard on news today that Peter Satswell the well known Gay rights campaigner was saying that George Michael should have come out as Gay in the Eighties as it would have helped a lot of people with their sexuality. But he then says he knew it was tough to do that back then

Well im sorry but if George decided he was not ready at the time then it was his business. How come no one is having a go at Elton John not coming out at that time. He went to the extreme of getting married to hide his sexuality”

He didn't say that.


Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“He never said that at all. While I'm no fan of some of the things he says, he was in LBC the day George died. What he actually said was that he doesn't think anyone should be forced to come out. Unless they are homophobic and anti gay while being closeted. Whether you agree with him or not, it was a fair and measured response from him.”

Originally Posted by jjwales:
“Peter Tatchell did not say that GM should have come out as gay earlier. He wrote a very sympathetic article about him, including the following paragraph. (I've put the important bits in bold.)
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a7496321.html”

Thank you both. Another DS thread and posts based on false information.

Originally Posted by ShaunIOW:
“It was up to George when he came out and no one else, I was reading yesterday that he waitied till his mother passed away before coming out.”

He didn't have his first gay relationship until he was 27 and his partner subsequently died from AIDS. He came out publicly in 1998 a year after his mother died when he was arrested after the Los Angeles public toilets police set up.
He said he wanted to protect his mother because of the AIDS epidemic which is absolutely understandable. It was a death sentence.
<<
<
3 of 3
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map