Avert thine innocent eyes.

Until about four hours ago, today was going rather well. That was until I read this piece of garbage and choked on my last dorito. Not only was I angry because a man with a face like a melted welly had ruined my final crisp but more importantly because such arrogant, self-righteous wankers are still allowed to publish articles blatantly sprouting their own shitey opinions on matters that don’t, and probably won’t ever personally affect them.

This toss pott, who more commonly goes by the name Brian Sewell, apparently believes that soaps are now only ‘Wall-to-wall gays, transsexuals, transvestites and teenage lesbians’ and that ‘the sane man may feel his nose is being rubbed in it.’ If  by the sane man Sewell is reffering to himself alongside all other heterosexual males I seriously hope someone picks him up pronto and dumps him at the door of the nearest mental institution. It’d be for his, and more importantly, our own good.

I will now take great pleasure in ripping his piece of shit opinion to shreds.

• “For fully half a century,  Coronation Street has formed the nation’s view of Lancashire. Life is gritty; men are tough; in their devious ways women have achieved equality — if not downright dominance — and society is sterlingly working-class.” - Women have reached equality? In fact scratch that.. apparently we’ve achieved dominance?! I’m not quite sure if I should piss myself laughing or throw something heavy in the general direction of his face. On the programmes own website I’m struggling to find a male character profile who’s ‘likes’ don’t consist of ‘The ladies’ whilst on the other hand I’m finding it even harder to find a female character who doesn’t like to either gossip or be noticed. Since obviously that’s all women live for after all.

• “Today, however, the soap that was once pure Salford…has departed from reality.” - For this I don’t even need to write my own response. The top comment on this atrocious article says it all. ‘Ha! One small northern cobbled street – multiple murders, numerous rapes, child abductions, serial affairs, crazy killers, tram explosions, factory fires – but the gradual introduction of a few gay characters suddenly makes it ‘unrealistic’? What planet is this guy living on? LOL!’

• “Today, all the characters are showered, prinked and perfumed — particularly the men.” - God. You can nearly feel his tears. WHAT THE FUCK HAS HAPPENED TO THE MANLY MAN?! Ehm. Whatever.

• “Are these well-washed denizens of the Street really the ordinary people there, leading their ordinary lives?” - Well let me see… since it’s a soap opera I highly doubt it. I don’t really think Corrie is an accurate view on a real place. So it’s probably not people leading their ordinary lives. Sorry to burst your wee happy Corrie bubble Brian. If I hadn’t used them all cleaning up the water I spat out whilst reading most of your comments I’d send you a tissue so you could dry your eyes. My apologies.

• 

  WRONG. AVERT THINE INNOCENT EYES.

  “Is it true that the lives of heterosexual Mancunians are haplessly intertwined with transvestites, transsexuals, teenage lesbians and a horde of homosexuals across the age range?” - It might surprise you but members of the LGBT community exist alongside heterosexual ‘normal’ people. You see that’s the ‘beauty’ of the human race. We’re all different but inhabit the same place. Gay folk aren’t like lepers. They don’t form a community away from the ‘normal’ members of society in order to receive special anti homo treatments. Probably because there’s nothing to treat. I suggest you remove yourself from the windowless box you currently live in and open your fucking eyes.

• “Where once we had no gaiety at all, we now, perhaps, have rather too much.” - But of course heterosexual sex should be allowed to dominate our television for the rest of eternity. Unlike the gays, the straights obviously won’t harm our children.
  “Among the main cast, we have lesbian teenagers Sophie Webster and her girlfriend Sian Powers…” - Okay. What’s out of the ordinary here? We have lesbian teenagers? Yes. Well done. You’ve established that people can know they’re gay from a young age. Kudos. It’s NORMAL.
  “There’s also homosexual Sean Tully…who is set to tie the knot with boyfriend Marcus Dent later this year in what will be the show’s first civil partnership.” - Bet there wouldn’t be an issue if Sally was to marry Kev or whatever. But guess what. Men marrying men is NORMAL.
  “And middle-aged cross-dresser Marc Selby who was involved in a love triangle with hairdresser Audrey Roberts and her glamorous friend Claudia Colby..” - The only thing that annoys me about this statement is that most trans or gay characters are always involved in storylines to do with three way relationships or anything else that can be deemed out of the ordinary. They’re never just allowed to exist for who they are. None the less the character is still NORMAL.

• “There are also countless peripheral gay characters” - There are also countless peripheral straight characters. FUCK ME. How am I meant to cope?

• “There’s too much, not only of gay men — who are estimated to make up just 6 per cent of the population, but who dominate the storylines in the soap — but also of lesbians,  bisexuals, the trans-gender community, cross-dressers and everyone else with some sexual quirk or fetish.” - I’ve already commented on the apparent percentage of the gay population here. But just incase you can’t be bothered to click the link, 6.7% of the population use the gay dating website Gaydar. Now if I’m correct here not every straight cunt out there is using eharmony or the like so it’s quite possible that gay folk are the same. So you can shove your wee 6% statistic up your fucking arse.

• 

  Wait. This shit actually happens? :O

  “EastEnders is at it, too, with, last month, boys in bed together, apparently naked.” – OH MY GOD. SHOCK FUCKING HORROR. Boys? In bed? Naked? TOGETHER? *vomit*. Get a fucking grip of yourself.

• “The dear old egalitarian BBC protested that its policy is  to portray gay and hetero- sexual relationships in  exactly the same way, both equally suitable for pre-watershed viewing. But are they equally suitable? ” – In other words. THINK OF THE CHILDREN?! I hope you’ve no children. I feel for them having to deal with a ignorant cunt for a father. You can’t blindfold your children from reality. These kind of people exist and rightly so. Stop treating them like they’re lesser people.




• “A new book, Primetime Propaganda by Benjamin Shapiro, argues that in California an exclusively liberal TV establishment shapes taste, style, politics and family life and attitudes, complaining that gay writers, directors and actors admit to promoting their own gay rights agendas. ” – If I’m reading this correctly apparently gay people now aren’t or shouldn’t be entitled to the same rights as straight people? For centuries straight writers and directors have been allowed to promote their own agendas but the minute gay writers do the same it becomes an issue. No. Not fucking okay.

• “They favour their own prejudices, be these of minority, race or sexual direction.” – LOL. What a complete fucking hypocrite. That is all.

• 

  The resemblance is uncanny.

  “It fosters all minorities and gives them a disproportionate amount of airtime…— in this land of equal opportunities, minorities are given the opportunity to punch above their weight.” – Is this guy serious? Did he just say something about equal opportunities except some are given too many opportunities? I feel like I’m reading Animal fucking Farm, with Sewell being Napoleon, the fat greedy pig (I’m sure I can see a physical resemblance), stating that humans are equal but some humans are more equal than others. Get off your high horse. You do not have the right to decide who gets to voice there opinion and who should not, so I suggest you zip it.




• ‘Upsets the balance of the Street and abandons the homely, traditional values that have attracted millions of viewers.’ – Cool. Let’s just live a lie then. The gays don’t exist. The LGBT community should totally be shut away in the deepest darkest corners of the world and kept dirty little disgusting secret. A scare story for children all over the world. That’s an excellent plan.




• ‘The audience, fearful of a descent into moral turpitude, must press a button and turn off the programme.’ – I seriously wish I could press a button and turn of Sewell. If only things were that simple.

What’s it going to take for closed minded chumps like Sewell to remove their heads from their arses and realise that not everyone must be like them. Members of the LGBT society do not deserve to be hidden away and these story lines should be allowed on T.V. no matter what time of day. Why? Because there is, and will never be anything wrong with being Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual or Trans.

Regular news readers may be overcome with a sense of gay ja vu yesterday at the news that yet another “member of the hospitality community” thinks that the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007 which outlaws discrimination against gay people doesn’t apply the them.

They can't come to my house either...creepy bastards

Homophobic hoteliers Peter and Hazelmary Bull, owners of the Chymorvah Hotel, were found by a judge to have broke the law when they refused a gay couple a room in their hotel.  They claimed that this was OK because their website explicitly stated that double rooms were only for married couples.  Humilated and without anywhere to stay the couple took the Hotel to court and won.  Mr and Mrs Bull were forced to stump up £1800 to each man.  The hotel owners are now in despair according to the Daily Mail – who suggested the whole thing was a plot by Stonewall.  If that is true then Stonewall have gone way up in my estimations.  But its doubtless bollocks.  Both the Daily Mail, and the couple believe this is suppression of their Christian faith with our favourite paper going as far as to claim (let’s hope correctly) that, “The ruling by a judge in Bristol sealed the supremacy of gay rights over Christian belief.”

But what Biblical context can the pair claim for their attitudes?  The Bibles main man had this to say on homosexuality. Sweet FA.  It seems strange that in 32 years of parables and ramblings Jesus wouldn’t deem it fit to comment on the matter.  Sure Mosaic Law – abolished by Jesus -  and in particular the book of Leviticus is a bit hell fire and brimstone on the old gay thang.  It would also strongly condemn the eating of “Pork with Madiera and Cream” (Leviticus 11:7) being served at the aforementioned hotel.  Lets also hope the property was free of mildew (particularly the kind with reddish of greenish spots outlined in Leviticus 14: 33-54) otherwise the couple will have spent their lives emptying their hotel, having the priest inspect it, closing down the hotel for 7 days then having the priest come back to declare it ritual clean.  And that would be a pain in the arse if you have lines of gays to turn away.

Jonathan & David: Shows Yer Girdles!

But hey fairs fair, they weren’t, as the rules of the Hotel stated, a married couple.  It is unlikely the Bulls would have thoroughly interrogated straight couples, demanded marriage certificates etc.  And Steven and Martin couldn’t be married anyway but they were in a civil partnership.  Which may not be quite marriage but is still a kind of…covenant.  So what does the bible say about a covenant?

“Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.” (1 Samuel 18:1-4)

Mmmmm….Kinky.

Biblical context aside the ruling does set a legal precedent by confirming “There is no material difference between marriage and a civil partnership.”  The ruling also confirms (again) that when you run a business you lose your right to discriminate.  The Orwellian claim by the Bulls that “some people are more equal than others” is astounding giving that they wanted a right to discriminate based on their own belief system.  This Christian belief again is more equal than any other system.  If we want everyone to be equal here are a few suggestions:

• Abolish the two tier system and let gay and lesbian couples get married and straight couples have civil partnerships
• Scrap laws which exempt the Church and religious organisation from being able to discriminate based on sexual orientation or religion.
• Abolish all “faith” schools and implement an integrated, secular education system.

Until then I leave you with the words of Mike Judge of the Christian Institute who stated, “This ruling is further evidence that equality laws are being used as a sword rather than a shield.”  It seems if biblical homos King David and Jonathan want a bit of sword (and girdle) action then they should avoid the Chymorvah Hotel for a while.

Elton John and his partner David Furnish had their first child a few days ago -  baby Zachary was born to a surrogate mother on Christmas Day.

A new baby who is wanted, provided for and loved is always something to celebrate, and the congratulations from Elton’s celebrity and media pals have been flooding in. But those congratulations are nothing more than a piss in the ocean of criticism and revulsion that is being fired in the direction of the new fathers.

Well, I suppose there always ethical questions… is it right to create a new child through surrogacy, when so many already existing children are without a home or a family to love and provide for them? But plenty of heterosexual couples make babies via surrogacy or IVF, so there’s not much of a problem here. ..

And Elton John is a little old, at 63… but his partner is only 48. Men can naturally make babies well beyond either of these ages, and much older women in heterosexual relationships have babies with the help of science frequently, so no problems with that…

But… THEY’RE GAY. omg.

Daily Mail columnist Bel Mooney came out with the typical no-offense-but-I’m-about-to-say-something-really-offensive response…

I wince to think of baby ­Zachary Jackson Levon ­Furnish-John coming home from school in four years’ time and asking David or Elton: ‘But who is my mummy?’

Um. Ok. Why is the automatic assumption that gay-parenting is made up of secrets and lies? The “who is my mummy” question is pretty similar to the “where do babies come from” question. And if a child’s questions are answered factually and with love, then no problems will occur.

The problems experienced by children of gay parents are not experienced because their parents are gay – but because of the reactions of the people around them to the fact that they have two mothers or fathers.

Zachary Furnish-John is 5 days old, and the process of fucking him up has already begun. Not by his parents. But by homophobes and people overwhelmed by hate and fear.

People like the wonderful citizens of the internet who said things like this:

Sick, sick, sick,  this is ridiculous, soon the world will be taken over by gay’s

obsene

SICK

Absolute sickening the morals of the gutter from a person of proven depravity

I shudder to think how the child will be brought up! A child needs a father and motherly upbringing not by two men who are both homosexual (the word gay has been butchered from it’s original pleasant meaning).
How can a homosexual man be a woman? How is the child going to feel when he starts to grown and see other children with a mother and a father? Seems to me that some people are more interested in the rights of homosexual couples than the right of a child, male or female, to have a mother and father ( for those with a simplistic and selfish mindset, that  is, father = male and mother = female, they are quite easy to tell apart).
I thought it was interesting that they made sure the child was a male. Does make you wonder what the real motive is. I know the laws of the Ukraine and I also know how you can get around those laws – Gruivna ($$$$$)

I pity this poor child in his later life.   What will happen when they get him in bed with  them.   Will they take turns in bathing him?.   It does not matter what education he receives he will end up a very backward adult.   How sick these people are who support this kind of action?   Very sick I should say.

disgusting

P AEDOPHILES

Very, very, very Sick !!

paedo rock, hang the sick f—–s. no child should be allowed to be within a mile of these unhealthy parasitic low life ****’s

Freaks should not be allowed to have children living with them end of

Its an absolute outrage.  Shame on the person who sold them the child you are as disgraceful as those two

A disgrace. They just want something to play with in their disgusting old age, why else would they specify a boy, having failed to buy one in the Ukraine. They should keep themselves to themselves and interbreed, and discover the thing we all know, that it’s not natural. As always, too many do gooders in this world who only want to appease.

Anyone who agrees with what these two perverts have done is as sick, twisted and disgusting as they are!!!

just another, MUST HAVE accessory, for this pair of poofters.

Its just sick and un-natural, end of..

SICK SICK SICK      another trainee for the gay society

I thought there were laws to protect children from freaks and weirdos.

Sick and very very wrong, what is this world coming to?

Sickening indulgent self righteous faggots -they both suck! -o sooooory no pun intended

Utter disgust at reading this. Another pair of mincers getting headlines for all the wrong reasons.

What I would like to know is why is it alright with the establishment for two perverts to rear a child but for the same child to sit on Father Christmas’s, knee is forbidden and before all the do-gooders jump up and down remember the only reason homosexuality was legalised was because of all the MP;s, Judges and Councillors who getting NAMED and SHAMED.

Forgive my ignorance but has either of these perverts had any input in the baby making process as in filling the turkey baster?

All from the comments on this article. At least they removed the one saying “he won’t need to be breastfed – he’ll be prostate milked”…

SSY has already covered the world cup extensively earlier this year, and like all Scots we were also on the edge of our seats a few weeks ago, hoping and praying that England would not win the 2018 World Cup – despite the predictions of a certain deceased psychic octopus. Fortunately we were spared the inevitable comparisons to 1966 once every 3 seconds by Alan Hansen etc, and the rising power of Russia was able to claim victory as part of a bid that was based on tactical use of bribes and polonium sandwiches.

Sepp Blatter making sure those pesky gays don't steal his trophy

What’s not been in the news as much (probably cos it’s ages away) was Qatar’s successful bid for the 2022 World Cup. Their victory was surprising given that Qatar have never successfully qualified for a World Cup and have a population of only 1.7 million, making them both smaller and even shiter at football than Scotland. The most likely reason Qatar was awarded the World Cup was to raise the profile of football in the Arab and Islamic world – similar to why the USA was awarded the tournament in 1994, to open a new market for the game.

Their bid’s already causing controversy though, 12 years before it’s due to start due to Qatar’s ban on homosexuality. Sepp Blatter, the Fifa president has a handy solution to any LGBT fans who travel to Qatar to see the game – don’t get up to any gay sex. Well that’s that sorted then. His comments have already understandably created fury among LGBT football associations who want the right for their members to travel and enjoy a World Cup without the fear of being jailed just for being gay.

It’s another controversy Blatter faces alongside Fifa’s rampant corruption and his blocking of goal line technology (though we’re actually ok with that, ball never crossed the line). The bottom line is despite Qatar’s abuse of human rights, Fifa are attracted by the big bucks the Qatari state can provide. Qatar is a booming gulf state, whose wealth is based on a combination of massive oil and gas resources, and virtual slave labour. Like other GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) countries like Dubai, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar’s population is overwhelmingly made up of foreign workers. 37% of the population of the GCC states are made up of foreign workers and their families. 89% of Qatar’s workforce is made up of foreign workers who are paid abysmally in the construction of some of the most opulent and stunning buildings on earth.

Doha, Qatar. Brought to you by slave labour.

Alongside low paid workers, Qatar still has actual slavery. The USA has attacked Qatar for not doing enough to end human trafficking, which is punished with the same severity as selling booze (6 months in jail). This form of trafficking occurs when workers from Asia are recruited to work in projects in Qatar only to find that their wages and working conditions are worse than what was advertised. Their employers stop them from leaving by confiscating their passports – leaving them with no option but to stay in Qatar and work as virtual slaves.

Those Qataris (and European expats) who have got rich out of Qatar’s oil wealth and low paid labour are also free to take on and violently abuse servants without fear of jail or the law. Across all the GCC states there are frequent reports of maids being physically tortured by their employers. This isn’t just an Arab or an Islamic practice either, European expats in Qatar have also taken advantage of the states lack of the most basic workers rights to abuse their employees.

As SSY has previously covered, international sporting events – be it the Commonwealth Games or the World Cup – do not occur in a vacuum and they are not neutral. They are controlled by the billionaire states and multinational corporations for their own benefit, over and above the millons of people who want to enjoy the tournaments but find their homes or rights as workers in conflict with the hosts of the games. SSY hopes that by 2022 the LGBT fans and the workers in Qatar, who have already proven they can strike, will be able to enjoy the World Cup as equals and not slaves in a society where the gap between rich and poor would make Victorian Britain look egalitarian.

Russians, shortarse Frenchmen, artistic pictures of horses and people who duet with Blue: Just some of the things that the US government HATES

The publication last week of the first few batches of leaked US embassy cables has brought whistleblower website WikiLeaks – as well as the fate of its founder and editor in chief Julian Assange – dramatically to the front pages and top bills of news media around the world. As this article was being drafted, Assange, the website’s principal spokesperson and main public figure, is reported to be have been taken into custody in London, in connection with alleged sex offences in Stockholm in August this year. Unlike some others, SSY prefers to take rape allegations seriously, at least until substantial evidence suggests we should do otherwise.

To deal with this issue first, first of all let’s say something – Wikileaks is not Julian Assange, and Julian Assange is not Wikileaks. Attempting to repress and punish Wikileaks for being inconvenient and worrying to the establishment is not the same as a man being arrested because he is suspected of the very serious crime of rape. Let’s not confuse Assange with Wikileaks. Wikileaks (with Assange as its public face), as we will go on to discuss, has made a brilliant contribution to anti-imperialist activism and we absolutely applaud it for that. Do not let the fact that Wikileaks has got the right ideas about freedom of information blind us to the fact that rape is one of the most reprehensible crimes someone can commit, and that violence (sexual, physical, psychological, emotional) against women (which the overwhelming majority of the time goes unpunished) should be opposed in all its forms – and perpetrators brought to justice where it has been committed.. We offer no opinion on whether Julian Assange is guilty of the crimes that he has now been charged with. It wouldn’t be appropriate. But neither is it appropriate for socialists to promote the position that the women who have made allegations against him should be disbelieved, simply because Assange’s organisation Wikileaks do good things, or because of what the women have said on the internet in the past, or because they are women – which is what a lot of the ‘Defend Assange’ stuff out there on the interwebs is boiling down to. Just because we consider someone to be a “good man” who promotes some of the same ideals that we do does not mean that, if they HAVE abused women, they should get away with it, sticking it to the man yeah? Many men, men who consider themselves to be left wing, are using this arrest as an excuse to propagate often repeated rape myths, and this is unacceptable. Rape myths should always be challenged, no matter how suspicious you find the timing of Assange’s arrest. It’s sad to see people we respect, like Naomi Wolf join in the reactionary smear campaign against the women who reported Assange to the Swedish authorities. This is a misguided approach to anti-imperialism. You have to be anti-patriarchy too, or sorry, you’re not a socialist. For a brilliant article on the meaning of the word ‘consent’, visit Feministe. No means no, and tricking someone in to consenting to sex is rape. That goes in all cases, not just the ones where there’s no left wing icons who might be involved. Now, on to the substantial issue of the leaked cables..

WikiLeaks was founded in 2006, originally adopting a wiki-style of organisation (similar to Wikipedia, where users could freely upload, edit and discuss documents. However it has since taken on a far tighter editorial policy, as it became clear the wiki format wasn’t appropriate for the organisation’s aims.

The ongoing release of US embassy cables – taken from the US military internet system SIPRNet (insert Terminator joke here) and representing a database of some quarter of a million secret communications from US embassies around the world – is just the latest in a long line of high profile stories broken by the organisation.

Read the rest of this entry »

This week The Office of National Statistics released the figures from a new survey, which claimed that only 1.5% or 1 in 100 British citizens identity as Gay, Lesbian or Bisexual.

After interviewing only a small percentage of the population the ONS have come to the ‘concrete’ conclusion that only “480,000 adults describe themselves as homosexuals — just one in every 100. Another 245,000 — or one in 200 — are bisexual.”

Their statistics also claim to prove that the majority of those who openly admitted to being gay were more likely to have jobs higher up the career ladder than their heterosexual colleagues. 49.1% of gay people are in managerial or professional positions compared to 30.6% of straight people. However, that 49.1% of the boss class have already built up enough cushioning to be able to give up their straight ‘privilege’ and don’t have the worry of losing their position within society because they have the power to control any homophobia they might face. Whereas less powerful working class people, lower down the career ladder, don’t have this protection and have a lot more to lose. The statistic that 38% of gay people are also apparently better educated compared to 21.9% of straight people also backs this up – the ONS just haven’t thought very deeply about why that might be.

Homosexuals, according to this data, are also much younger than the rest of society with “66 percent under the age of 44 and 17 percent aged 16-24″. Which is most probably due to the fact that it’s more ‘acceptable’ to be out in today’s youth cultures than it has been in previous generations.

This survey also explains that: “A third of bisexual households include at least one child but only 8.6 per cent of gay or lesbian respondents live with a child.” Did it even cross these closed minded peoples’ heads that the one third of bisexual families mentioned were quite possibly living in a happy straight household and that the low rate of gay families with children might possibly have something to do with the way society has scapegoated gay parents and how much mad controversy there was about letting gay people adopt.

Naturally surveys like this must be taken seriously due to their obvious ‘accuracy’ and ‘impartiality’. If these articles tell us that only 480,000 adults describe themselves as gay or lesbian then of course we should ignore the fact that 2.2 million or 6.7% of British citizens use Gaydar or Gaydar Girls, just one of the many internet dating websites for LGBT members of society. Never mind the fact that most gay people, just like most straight people, aren’t even on sex hook up or dating websites.

Now that those champions of equality such as The Sun and The Daily Mail have given us this information, which shows us the ‘correct’ percentage of gay people in the British population, The Sun suggests that:

“Now we have a clearer view of the real figures, we need to start asking some serious questions about the vast sums of taxpayers’ money being spent on such a small minority and the disproportionate amount of attention they receive both in Whitehall and in the media.”

You know what would be easier? Turning around

And The Daily Mail proudly states that this survey has exploded “the assumption – long promoted by social experts and lobbyists – that the number is up to ten times higher than this at one in ten.”

Obviously The Sun aren’t completely hostile towards lesbians, as long as it blurs the line between news and porn. The image they used to illustrate the story is obviously a correct representation of lesbians in today’s society and NOT two women both contorting themselves to face the camera for the pleasure of shit head male Sun readers.

Although this ridiculous survey was probably just the result of stupidity at the ONS, the reaction of the right wing press shows that they clearly have an agenda to use homophobia as a way of cutting vital services that the LGBT community depends on, as seen in Glasgow. Here it is pretty much impossible to meet other gay or lesbian people unless you’re one of these well educated, confident, managerial types, who can afford to go to an expensive bar or club. Obviously unsure young people trying to figure out who they are DO NOT EXIST so they don’t need any money spent on supporting their needs.

Yesterday saw the biannual Glasgow LGBT Pride march in the city.

Held in cities all over the world every summer, Pride marches are traditionally an assertion of LGBT rights and a celebration of LGBT culture. The marches themselves have their origins as annual commemorations of the Stonewall Riots, a series of demonstrations against police oppression of the LGBT community in New York, in 1969. However, over the past two decades, the marches have, from their radical origins, been gradually become more and more commercial, with corporate sponsorship and more emphasis on cheap drinks offers and goody bags than remembering the radical history of the LGBT rights movement.

In Glasgow yesterday, SSY took our ‘Pride not Profit’ message to the Pride demonstration, as well as our witty Hate Mail spoof newspaper, which lambastes Tory homophobia and right-wing tabloid bigotry, which is sadly still all too prevalent.

DOWNLOAD ‘HATE MAIL’ HERE

Have you ever wondered what motivates people who are rampant homophobes? What lies behind the desperate attempts of some people to prove their heterosexuality by denying freedom to others based on their sexual orientation?

It’s actually supported by scientific evidence that a major cause of homophobia is the desire to repress unacknowledged or unwanted homosexual feelings. In August 1996 the American Psychological Association did a study in which they used penile plethysmography (basically the technological measurement of hard ons) to “precisely measure and record male tumescence” of men who were avowedly straight’s reactions to to erotic images. Some of the men were professed homophobes, and some were not, who acted as a control group. The homophobic group basically got a lot more aroused by gay imagery than the control group. Questioned afterwards, the homophobes consistently underrated how much they responded to homosexuality.

One group of activists even cleverly wrote to homophobic MPs who voted against equalising the age of consent for homosexual and heterosexual sex, and challenged them to take the same test of their knob’s reaction to gay stimuli.

Basically, the homophobes experienced severe anxiety and a sense of threat from gay images, which the non-homophobic control group did not. While this is in many ways tragic, and would lead us to the conclusion that many homophobes need help and support to come to terms with themselves and their own feelings, it doesn’t give an excuse for some of the truly awful things people do as a result of that anxiety.

There are many cases of prominent and powerful people who were driving a homophobic agenda in religion, politics or society in general who were actually gay themselves. While this self-loathing is tragic, the harm that these people do to the rights and freedoms of others is inexcusable. To celebrate today’s gay pride march, Leftfield brings you a selection of some of the world’s greatest sexual hypocrites (apologies for them all being American, if you’d like us help expand our list to the UK and around the world then give us some extras in the comments!):

Read the rest of this entry »

Not really, but who needs to tell the truth when you can make funny videos!

Buju Banton is one of the biggest names in dancehall music. He’s been making records for over 20 years, some of his undeniably great music has made him one of the biggest stars in Jamaica, and regarded by many as a voice for the poor majority.

Unfortunately, he’s also a violent homophobe. LGBT rights groups around the world have picketed his shows and called on promoters not to book him because of his anti-gay tunes. The most significant is ‘Boom Bye Bye,’ which is basically about killing LGBT people. It advocates shooting, burning and pouring acid as methods.

Many of his defenders claim that he was still a teenager when he released this tune in 1992, and he’s since moved on and doesn’t perform it any more. The truth is that Banton knows that it’s controversial, and so he’s careful about when he performs it because it can potentially get him in trouble. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t do it though, with his mike being cut off at a 2007 show in New York when he began the song.

It would be one thing if his hatred of LGBT people was confined to records, but it’s not. Several witnesses have identified him as part of a mob that broke into a home in Kingston in 2004 shouting homophobic insults, and then beat two men severely, leaving one of them blind in one eye.

Banton denies the claims, and the police have yet to charge him in connection with the attack. But the Jamaican police are notorious for the lack of care for violence against LGBT people, as homosexuality remains completely illegal in Jamaica and punishable by prison with hard labour.

Also in 2004, the founder of the Jamaican Forum for Lesbians, All-sexuals and Gays, (an organisation fighting for LGBT rights under very difficult circumstances and desperately in need of support), Brian Williamson, was murdered in his home by multiple stab wounds from a machete.

Buju Banton himself is currently in US prison after being charged with possession with intent to distribute cocaine last year. But in the meantime, his homophobic lyrics continue to be a rallying cry for hate, which is why the Eclectic Method have put together this little video to set the record straight:

Check your 'Purcell & Black' for irregularities and residue every month when you're in the shower.

Ah, Steven Purcell. Him leaving Glasgow City Council has been like one of those horribly awkward and protracted breakups that ends up sucking in a whole social circle, and you know the basic story of what happened but you get the feeling there’s more to it. Gradually, ever more horrible, cringeworthy and sometimes fucking funny details just keep leaking out. Of course, situations like that are gifts for gossipy petty folk who can’t get enough of delighting in the right people’s misery, and us folk at Leftfield are no exception. So it was with no small amount of schadenfreude that we learned that the Castro Centre, the new incarnation of the Glasgow LGBT centre which was forced to close down with debts of £300,000 looks like it’s about to close as well, because of *drumroll* big debts and possible massive corruption.

Please understand, it’s not the fact that Glasgow is possibly about to lose its only dedicated LGBT community centre for the second time that’s causing this glee. The fact that it may close again is a frankly ridiculous and outrageous situation. However, a large amount of disturbing evidence has emerged from various sources that suggests that not only has Labour councillor Ruth Black (who ran the last LGBT centre and left her post just months before the centre was forced to close with crippling debts) only managed to find herself back in charge due to good old Purcell brand ‘irregularities’, but also that the centre is being run poorly and downright dishonestly.

When the LGBT centre first closed, people were understandably angry and upset. Groups lost a meeting place they’d had for years, and this was of particular concern to support organisations like Crosslynx Glasgow (a trans support group) who had very real concerns about finding a venue where they’d feel (and be) safe. As well as this, groups received virtually no notice that the centre was about to go under, and faced a frantic scrabble to find a new venue in order to stop a loss of momentum and members. As if that all wasn’t frustrating enough, what actually happened to the LGBT centre is still shrouded in mystery; all we really know for sure is that when it closed it was £300,000 in debt and that there were angry refutations of any suggestion of irregularity or incompetence in management posted to the GLGBT website before it was taken down for good. Also, there were whisperings in the papers that Ruth Black had essentially run it into the ground, but the stock response was she had left her job months before the closure and so had nothing to do with it. Which is a pretty pish counterargument, but oh well! Maybe, we hoped, Glasgow would have an LGBT centre again soon, and it would be better run and hopefully be a fun, useful and supportive place for LGBT folk to hang about. However, what actually happened was that Glasgow Labour cronyism did what it does best; ignored what was best for the people a service is meant to, you know, serve, and instead just did what was best for their councillors.

Read the rest of this entry »