Saturday, 31 July 2010

Those Of A 'Gay' Disposition

Back in the days when I were but a lad, prior to the 'bastardisation' of the English language, being 'gay' meant one was happy and carefree. Unfortunately then along came the 'Equality' and 'Diversity', 'We can't upset anyone' brigade who conned the public into believing that calling someone a homosexual, or lesbian, was degrading and offensive.

It now appears that Clare Balding (she of the horse world) has been offended by an article in the Sunday Times, written by AA Gill. The response from the Sunday Times editor, John Witherow, seems perfectly reasonable:
"In my view some members of the gay community need to stop regarding themselves as having a special victim status and behave like any other sensible group that is accepted by society. Not having a privileged status means, of course, one must accept occasionally being the butt of jokes. A person's sexuality should not give them a protected status."
If one accepts that hetrosexual practice is the norm in this country then why are those whose practice some might then say is abnormal feel a need to alter the meaning of a word to describe their sexual preferences? Because of being ashamed or an inferiority complex?

Just asking...............................


john in cheshire said...

totally agree. and i am gay.

Witterings From Witney said...

Thank you for your agreement - needless to say I have nothing against 'gay' people, what I object to is this attitude of 'you can't upset those who are different' and having that rammed down my throat at every opportunity!

subrosa said...

I'm just weary of hearing bleating from the gay lobby. They're not special. Can't they get that into their heads?