|
||||||||
The gay boy? |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#76 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 585
|
Quote:
Reminder: She is a Scientologist. They hate gay people.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#77 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,811
|
Quote:
Just like Tom Cruise and John Travolta...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#78 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,617
|
Scientologists hate gay people? No-one bats an eyelid.
I know another faith that throws them off buildings, but name them and you'll be called a racist, xenophobic bigot. |
|
|
|
|
|
#79 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 16,505
|
She referred to a gay person as "a gay boy". What's the bloody problem? As a gay man myself I wasn't offended by anything she said. People love to take things, twist them and get carried away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#80 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 7,579
|
Some of the other HMs visibly took offence. She immediately backtracked and passed it off as a joke. She has no courage or conviction. Or maybe it was just first day nerves and she will stand up for herself a bit more as the days go by.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#81 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 782
|
I'm more offended by her being a Scientologist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#82 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 7
|
People are missing the point. It wasn't the fact she called him the 'gay boy.' It was her calling him the gay boy and implying that since he was gay it could make other people uncomfortable. Personally, I thought it was a bit derogatory.
If someone made the same assumption on her being the 'black woman' people would be throwing the racist card all over the place. |
|
|
|
|
|
#83 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,277
|
Quote:
Scientologists hate gay people? No-one bats an eyelid.
I know another faith that throws them off buildings, but name them and you'll be called a racist, xenophobic bigot. |
|
|
|
|
|
#84 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: North East
Posts: 757
|
Quote:
People are missing the point. It wasn't the fact she called him the 'gay boy.' It was her calling him the gay boy and implying that since he was gay it could make other people uncomfortable. Personally, I thought it was a bit derogatory.
If someone made the same assumption on her being the 'black woman' people would be throwing the racist card all over the place. |
|
|
|
|
|
#85 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,896
|
Quote:
People are missing the point. It wasn't the fact she called him the 'gay boy.' It was her calling him the gay boy and implying that since he was gay it could make other people uncomfortable. Personally, I thought it was a bit derogatory.
If someone made the same assumption on her being the 'black woman' people would be throwing the racist card all over the place. |
|
|
|
|
|
#86 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 182
|
Quote:
Please bear with me, I am old and struggle to keep up with this generation perpetual state of offence.
Is it offensive to call a gay boy a gay boy now? What are we allowed to call him? A homosexual adolescent? These are terms that single people out as the minority ie different from the 'norm'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#87 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,617
|
Quote:
Yes it is. You wouldn't refer to a heterosexual as that 'straight boy'.
These are terms that single people out as the minority ie different from the 'norm'. If there was a room full of homosexual men, and one straight one then of course I'd be likely refer to him as the straight boy! Why on earth wouldn't I? |
|
|
|
|
|
#88 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,151
|
Quote:
If there was a room full of homosexual men, and one straight one then of course I'd be likely refer to him as the straight boy! Why on earth wouldn't I?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#89 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,811
|
Quote:
If there was a room full of homosexual men, and one straight one then of course I'd be likely refer to him as the straight boy! Why on earth wouldn't I?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#90 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,523
|
Quote:
Please bear with me, I am old and struggle to keep up with this generation perpetual state of offence.
Is it offensive to call a gay boy a gay boy now? What are we allowed to call him? A homosexual adolescent? Referring to people as 'gay boys' in the way the term was used before civilisation was wrong then and is wrong now and I'm afraid people who can't see that are a much bigger problem than the easily offended brigade. As for the particular instance in BB ,it certainly didn't look good or respectful and was at best a bit throwaway but we have more to fear from self confessed old timers who think of gay boys the way they did when those same boys were being beaten up due to their sexuality. |
|
|
|
|
|
#91 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 16,515
|
Quote:
you would think in america they would be more sensitive to such terming...
but they are not because it is only in pc uk you cant use an orientation or a colour in a sentence without it being highlighted as meaning more than it does. all i noticed was how fast James was to make sure that reply was as highlighted as possible,,, not only making her repeat it but then to put a soundbite joke at the end to ensure it got highlights time and to take the opportunity to make sure once and for all that everyone knows "I'm straight"
|
|
|
|
|
|
#92 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,617
|
Quote:
This is exactly the reason why we have what some people would call 'a culture of being offended'.....political correctness came about to make people aware that they need to treat others with respect,no more and no less :
Referring to people as 'gay boys' in the way the term was used before civilisation was wrong then and is wrong now and I'm afraid people who can't see that are a much bigger problem than the easily offended brigade. As for the particular instance in BB ,it certainly didn't look good or respectful and was at best a bit throwaway but we have more to fear from self confessed old timers who think of gay boys the way they did when those same boys were being beaten up due to their sexuality. However, its no more (or less) wrong than being beaten up for your weight, your hair colour, your name being funny, wearing glasses, because your sister is promiscuous, because your dad is a morris dancer, because you choose to play a musical instrument, because you support the wrong football team or ANY OTHER REASON that an innocent person gets beaten up. During my lifetime I have seen all the examples I have given above, and I struggle to understand why those examples should be any different from and of the trendy "isms" (racism, sexism, Homophobia) A civilised society would see the "beating up" as the problem, not the reason for it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#93 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 16,515
|
Quote:
This is exactly the reason why we have what some people would call 'a culture of being offended'.....political correctness came about to make people aware that they need to treat others with respect,no more and no less :
Referring to people as 'gay boys' in the way the term was used before civilisation was wrong then and is wrong now and I'm afraid people who can't see that are a much bigger problem than the easily offended brigade. As for the particular instance in BB ,it certainly didn't look good or respectful and was at best a bit throwaway but we have more to fear from self confessed old timers who think of gay boys the way they did when those same boys were being beaten up due to their sexuality. ) so in her culture could be a term of endearment and respect
|
|
|
|
|
|
#94 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,523
|
Quote:
See this is the problem as I see it - Being beaten up for your sexuality is wrong, no question.
However, its no more (or less) wrong than being beaten up for your weight, your hair colour, your name being funny, wearing glasses, because your sister is promiscuous, because your dad is a morris dancer, because you choose to play a musical instrument, because you support the wrong football team or ANY OTHER REASON that an innocent person gets beaten up. During my lifetime I have seen all the examples I have given above, and I struggle to understand why those examples should be any different from and of the trendy "isms" (racism, sexism, Homophobia) A civilised society would see the "beating up" as the problem, not the reason for it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#95 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,617
|
Personally I'd rather be called "white boy" than White Trash, as per Jermaine Jackson, but I seem to recall anyone who took offence to that was generally told to lighten up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#96 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,811
|
Quote:
Personally I'd rather be called "white boy" than White Trash, as per Jermaine Jackson, but I seem to recall anyone who took offence to that was generally told to lighten up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#97 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 25,445
|
Quote:
she just can't remember the names yet, in another scene she referred to James J as "knob boy"
![]() In that case I'm warming to her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#98 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 25,445
|
Quote:
This is a very interesting point DrZ and one I agree with. I'm so worried these days about what is and isn't politically correct I sometimes say the wrong thing inadvertently. Surely context and tone are all important too in how something was meant. When you don't know someone's name, then you inevitably pick on some distinguishing feature to indicate to someone else who you mean. For example, I'm a teacher and when we get a new intake in each year it takes a while to learn their names. If I wanted to refer to a pupil in the staffroom and I did not yet know their name, then I would have to use other distinguishing features to show who I meant. So, presumably it's ok for me to say "the little blond girl with glasses", or "that tall ginger lad"? So if this is ok, why would it not be ok for me to say "the black boy" (we have very few ethnic minorities in our school, so his colour would be a distinguishing feature)? How is that in any way racist and yet I'm sure that some would say it is? I feel Stacy's comment was similar to this. Is it the term "gay boy" that people are objecting to? If she'd said "that gay lad" would that have been any better? If that was the only way she could distinguish him from the other men at the time, as she didn't know his name, I don't understand why anyone should think it's homophobic. Surely the way she said it, the context and the fact there were no derogatory comments associated with it, mean that it shouldn't cause offence?
I think the fact that she's a Scientologist makes a fair case for judging her remark in a negative way. Scientologists are not known for their love of the gay community. Regarding the actual term 'gay boy,' I've never heard it used in an affectionate, or even neutral way. In much the same way as 'Jew boy.' Context is (almost) everything I suppose. |
|
|
|
|
|
#99 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 248
|
Quote:
Reminder: She is a Scientologist. They hate gay people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#100 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 8,884
|
Quote:
People are missing the point. It wasn't the fact she called him the 'gay boy.' It was her calling him the gay boy and implying that since he was gay it could make other people uncomfortable. Personally, I thought it was a bit derogatory.
If someone made the same assumption on her being the 'black woman' people would be throwing the racist card all over the place. So, was she being offensive? Or was she just asking a fairly obvious question in a rather clumsy way? My money's on the latter. I'm a 'gay boy' btw. I wouldn't be particularly offended if a straight man expressed a preference to share with a fellow straight man rather than me. People have varying boundaries when it comes to personal and intimate space. It doesn't take too much effort to respect those. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:59.



