Cathal O'Searlaigh - gay icon?

The_Minister

Ok lads,
Most of you will have heard the story about the documentary and the poet, but that is not what this thread is about. There are other threads to discuss the "gory" details.

What do you all think of David Norris and other prominant gay figures, dismissing his actions as homosexuality, and all criticism as homophobia?
Many (including myself), would say that what the poet did was akin to gross exploitation, and I'm wondering how you feel, having that equated to homosexuality?

Just curious.

EDIT: Just realised that the title may mean something different than what I meant to convey. I'll change it in a sec when I can think of something a little clearer.

moridin

I dunno if this is a "gay" issue tbh.

For me, it's pretty simple. If you think that it's wrong that he did what he did, regardless of the gender of the kids involved or his sexual orientation, then you're hardly being homophobic by criticizing his actions, are you?

On the other hand, if you're only annoyed because it was a guy sleeping with consenting young guys, then there's a bit of homophobia evident there...

Personally, I think donating money for "favours" regardless of the gender involved is pretty sleazy, but I haven't been digging too much or watched the documentary.

Boston

The_Minister wrote: »

Ok lads,
Most of you will have heard the story about the documentary and the poet, but that is not what this thread is about. There are other threads to discuss the "gory" details.

What do you all think of David Norris and other prominant gay figures, dismissing his actions as homosexuality, and all criticism as homophobia?
Many (including myself), would say that what the poet did was akin to gross exploitation, and I'm wondering how you feel, having that equated to homosexuality?

Just curious.

EDIT: Just realised that the title may mean something different than what I meant to convey. I'll change it in a sec when I can think of something a little clearer.

Provide links to the Statement by David Norris and "other prominent gay figures", please.

The_Minister

Boston wrote: »

Provide links to the Statement by David Norris and "other prominent gay figures", please.

David Norris wrote a letter in the Irish Times, and attempted to get a Senate committee to call for the documentary to be banned.
I don't have access to the archives when I'm off campus, so I can't dig up either article at the moment.

EDIT: Sorry, he wanted the documentary not to be shown until it had passed a Dail committee http://www.independent.ie/national-news/norris-in-plea-for--o-searcaigh-probe-1314125.html

moridin

I don't see anything in either of these two reports from the times "dismissing his actions as homosexuality, and all criticism as homophobia".

====================

SEANAD REPORT: DAVID NORRIS (Ind) called for the showing of the film Fairytale of Kathmandu to be postponed until a full investigation by those qualified in the analysis of film had established the truth or falsehood of the techniques used in its production and the conclusions reached.

The forum in which this should be done was the Oireachtas Committee on Communications.

Mr Norris said the film purported to document the exploitation of young men in Nepal by the Donegal poet Cathal Ó Searcaigh.

"I have seen this work and I have grave concerns about the motives and methods employed. We are entitled by the spending of public money on it to know the truth, wherever it leads."

Mr Norris said an attempt was being made to create such a firestorm of hostile publicity that justice might never retrospectively be done. The film had been selectively leaked to quarters where it could be calculated to do most damage and most dangerously inflame opinion, he said.

"I am aware of the existence of a smear campaign against any who dare raise their voice to ask these questions. I am aware also of possible damage to my own standing in this community that I love. But I have chosen to make this intervention in what I consider to be the most appropriate place, the free parliament of the Irish people, because I love justice and truth even more than I fear any misunderstanding of my motives in so doing."

Despite denials, there had clearly been systematic creative editing.

"Moreover, the most disturbing image in the film is the sequence showing Mr Ó Searcaigh lovingly straightening the tie of what appeared to be a 14 or 15-year-old schoolboy with a satchel on his back. This is Narang. He is indeed boyish-looking but he is a 20-year-old physics student in a third-level college and his words need to be heard. He was 18 at the time of the film."

In an interview voluntarily given, this man alleged that he had been told he had been abandoned by the poet. He was naturally angry and he claimed to have been pressurised to give the answers the film-makers wanted.

"Calls have been made for Ó Searcaigh's poetry to be removed from the academic syllabus, the local authority grants for his house to be withdrawn and for him to be drummed out of Aosdána.

"Yet gloriously the artists of Ireland have supported him as they previously did in the case of Oscar Wilde. This is because they have a unique insight into the processes of works of creation and of destruction. I should make it clear that I support the brave letter by the artists in The Irish Times," Mr Norris added.

Cathaoirleach Pat Moylan told Mr Norris he could raise the matter with the chairman of the committee.


====================


RTÉ HAS rejected criticism by Independent Senator David Norris of its decision to transmit the Fairytale of Kathmandu documentary on poet Cathal Ó Searcaigh.

Raising the issue on the order of business in the Seanad yesterday afternoon, the Trinity College Senator called for last night's scheduled screening of the film on RTÉ1 to be postponed pending an investigation of the techniques used in its production.

He also called for the film to be referred to the Joint Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources "so that the truth can be established with the assistance of experts".

Leader of the House Donie Cassidy said he would pass the Senator's request to committee chairman John Cregan: "Given the forceful contributions, and particularly that of Senator Norris, I will have this done immediately after the order of business."

An RTÉ spokesman responded later: "We are strongly of the view that the broadcast of the documentary is in the public interest and that many of the issues raised by Cathal Ó Searcaigh's friends are really not relevant to the central thesis of the programme which concerns the relationship between the giver of aid and the recipients of aid."

Senator Norris told the House: "As public money has been spent on the film, we are entitled to know the truth wherever it leads."

When he saw the film, Senator Norris said his "stomach sank" and he thought of the words of the great British poet William Blake: O Rose, thou art sick!/ The invisible worm/ That flies in the night,/ In the howling storm,/ Has found out thy bed/ Of crimson joy;/ And his dark secret love/ Does thy life destroy."

The Cathaoirleach said: "The programme is a matter for the RTÉ Authority."

Senator Norris said: "The illegality is possibly a matter for this House. Communications is an appropriate matter for the committee established by both Houses of the Oireachtas to examine such matters."

He asked the Leader of the House "to ensure this matter is referred".

Labour's Senator Alex White said: "I have great sympathy with the position Senator Norris has taken in regard to this case but it is not appropriate that this House or a committee of the Oireachtas should determine what RTÉ broadcasts. That would be a step too far."

Earlier yesterday, RTÉ said it would broadcast the documentary despite failing to resolve a dispute over copyright with the poet's publisher.

Cló Iar-Chonnachta said yesterday it would consider taking legal action if poems over which it holds copyright were included in the film.

Ó Searcaigh has criticised his portrayal in the film and has described it as "not only distorted and inaccurate but also very damaging to my reputation".

An RTÉ spokesman said a "small re-edit" had been made to one scene on foot of an allegation made this week by Ó Searcaigh's representative, but that the poems would remain.

The_Minister

Unfortunately, you need Irish Times access for the letter itself.

Sorry, I'm not being clear enough. Norris, described his actions as being (AFAIR) acceptable, and implied that people only had a problem because it was between a man and boys. It was other people (including O'Searlaigh), who said more clearly that it was homophobia that was making people dissapprove.

EDIT: Actually, could the mods lock this for now? Its not fair to discuss this unless people can see the statements that I am referring to. I should have access in about a week. I'll try and dig up that Tribune article too if I can.

Boston

Not so fast. While the other articles posted by moridin show norris to be a fool detached from reality, the letter is not damning at all. If anything I agree with most of the points.

Controversy over Ó Searcaigh documentary

Madam, - Last week I received a copy of the programme for the Jameson Dublin International Film Festival. The first thing that caught my eye on opening it was a sultry poster of a muscular, half-naked youth in what a friend subsequently described to me as "a classic St Sebastian pose". The film was called Fairytale of Kathmandu .
The accompanying description presented it as a documentary on the poet Cathal Ó Searcaigh. I noted it as an interesting film that I would certainly like to see.
That Saturday your Weekend Review section carried a full-page account by Kathy Sheridan of the film and the process of its making that made me wonder if in fact it was not closer to a tabloid exposé of the poet's personal life. Ironically, but perhaps appropriately, the only other material on this page was a large advertisement featuring a picture of the late Oscar Wilde.
I know Mr Ó Searcaigh slightly and have had some occasional professional dealings with him. I have always found him to be open, honourable and generous and there is no question that he is a remarkable writer and performer of poetry in the Irish language. He may also be quite literally an innocent abroad when it comes to the making of bio-pics.
On Monday the subject was being pruriently ventilated on the Joe Duffy Show on RTÉ radio. On Tuesday the story was on the one o'clock news and also again on Joe Duffy . It now appears that the video has been made selectively available to members of the press and others. The health authorities, the Rape Crisis Centre and the police have now been involved.
This all revolves around suggestions that Mr Ó Searcaigh, who has clearly been the generous benefactor of quite a number of young men in Nepal, may also have had sexual relations with some of these youths, although it is not claimed that any of them were under the Nepali age of consent. The issue of disproportionate status, although not of coercion, has been raised.
There may indeed be some questions to be clarified. However, the manner in which these issues have been sensationally presented to the Irish public could hardly be construed as being helpful. Indeed Tuesday's Live Line showed signs of a witch-hunt being stirred up with calls for Ó Searcaigh's poetry to be withdrawn from the Leaving Certificate syllabus and for him to be drummed out of Aosdána. I find this very sad as I had hoped that we had in recent years matured beyond this ignorant vindictiveness.
On the other hand I was very struck by the bravery of the poet Máire Mhac an tSaoi, who, although elderly and, as she indicated herself, from a rather prim background, yet refused to be cowed into joining the pack baying for Ó Searcaigh's blood.
The stirring-up of this controversy may well advance the commercial prospects of this venture but one may ask if it advances the cause of justice and fairness. There are some, apparently, who are determined to push this into the criminal arena. The waters have been very effectively muddied by the fact that Mr Ó Searcaigh has already been subjected to an extensive media trial and by the selective introduction to the public consciousness of materials that appear to be damaging. Official investigations are apparently now being carried out also in Nepal.
Some of those critical of Mr Ó Searcaigh have actually questioned whether homosexuality exists at all in Nepal. This in itself betrays a certain mindset. The youths themselves, although above the age of consent, might well find it extremely difficult to be positive even about consensual sexual activities in a country where, according to your own paper, homosexual activity between males is completely illegal.
To return to my opening point, I find it strange that a film which now appears to be in fact largely centred on allegations of what is presented to be a form of emotional, if not sexual abuse of young men should be advertised by such sultry visual materials. I have always disliked being manipulated and I will not now be paying money to see this film as I do not wish to swell the profits of those involved and I hope that other people may take a similar view.
- Yours, etc,
Senator DAVID NORRIS, Seanad Éireann, Dublin 2.

flanum

im sorry but regardless of gender/sexuality etc... the word paedophile springs to mind!

Boston

flanum wrote: »

im sorry but regardless of gender/sexuality etc... the word paedophile springs to mind!

You should learn what the word means then.

Annasopra

flanum wrote: »

im sorry but regardless of gender/sexuality etc... the word paedophile springs to mind!

well it might spring to your mind but perhaps if you fully informed yourself it wouldn't

Annasopra

This is what you were looking for minister


Madam, - The controversy surrounding the documentary Fairytale of Kathmandu and the emotive allegations made against Mr Cathal Ó Searcaigh have whipped up public sentiment to the point of hysteria.

Given that it is a mere 15 years since homosexuality was decriminalised in Ireland and that much residual homophobia still remains, we believe it is irresponsible of RTÉ to broadcast it at this time and in its current form. There has not even been provision for a framing discussion before and after this documentary, which was always the tradition when dealing with sensitive subjects.

We believe there are serious breaches of the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland's code of standards and that it is in the public interest to put some of these concerns into the public domain.

Section 3.2 of the BCI Code of Programme Standards, relating to the inclusion of sexual conduct during programme material, states that "detailed scenes of a sexual nature must have strong editorial justification in a factual context. . ."

The sexual scenes in the film are implied from context and interviews but they involve real young people who do not have their anonymity protected.

The justification for exploiting the subjects of this film is that the director had an epiphany about "western exploitation". But there is no analysis of the film-maker's wonderings about the power of rich westerners and why she chooses her trusting friend to carry the weight of all the world's inequalities.

What are the issues that arise for anyone who makes prolonged stays in developing countries? At what point do relationships become exploitative, given that they are always in a context of economic inequality?

Section 3.4.2: of the code says: "Programme material shall not support or condone discrimination against any person or section of the community, in particular on the basis of age, gender. . .sexual orientation, disability, race or religion."

To suggest that this film is not about gender or sexual orientation is farcical. Whatever statements or intentions are professed by the film makers or RTÉ, some people may use this documentary to incite hatred against homosexuals. Had this documentary been attempted regarding a comparable heterosexual context, it would simply be a non-story.

When has RTÉ ever, in its long history, broadcast a documentary about the alleged sexual impropriety of a heterosexual, concerning consensual sex with someone over the age of consent?

Section 3.5.2 says: "Factual programming shall not contain material that could reasonably be expected to cause undue distress or offence unless it is editorially justified and in the public interest."

In our view, this programme causes undue distress to all those appearing in it and to their families and friends. There is no public interest to be served by feeding homophobic stereotypes of gay men. - Yours, etc,

MÁIRE MHAC AN tSAOI,

CONCUBHAR Ó LIATHÁIN,

MICHEAL Ó CONGHAILE

BRENDA NÍ SHUILLEABHÁIN,

GABRIEL ROSENSTOCK,

NUALA NÍ DOMNHAILL,

PADDY BUSHE,

HANS-CHRISTIAN OESER,

LILLIS Ó LAOIRE,

DEREK BALL

GORDON MACKENZIE,

Drimnagh,

Dublin 12.

Annasopra

and also this

http://bonhom.ie/2008/03/bootboy-fairytale-of-kathmandu.html

anotherlostie

We were talking about this at work today. Everyone (straight, of course) denounced him as a paedophile. When I asked how they would feel watching a 40 yr old man courting 16yr old girls, where 16 was the age of consent, the table fell pretty silent.

I must admit that when I heard the story first, I thought it was pretty dodgy. And morally, I still think it is. But no law was broken, and as the IT letter says, has a similar documentary on heterosexual relations ever been shown?

Boston

Things that stuck me about this entire thing
1) No one is denying the facts or claiming that what was portrayed never happened.
2) People keep pointing to the fact that it wasn't illegal as if that doesn't mean the guy is a sexual predator.
3) People are accusing the person that made the film of exploiting these young boys while willfully glossing over what O'Searlaigh has done.
4) People are pointing to heterosexual acts, as if that makes a difference.

The guy is a creep, pure and simple. To call him a pedophile simply dulls the impact of the word.

damien

Typical Norris and all his chums that have romantic concepts about Oscar Wilde, Walt Whitman and now Cathal O'Searlaigh. All people who groomed and preyed on boys, not men. Norris is a washed up loudmouth with no grasp of how the world has moved on but plenty of his acolytes dance around him for the noble things he did in the past and will defend anything he says or does. What ho! You'd wonder at times does he want homosexuality recriminalised so he can get a little of the limelight back again.

You also have to wonder whether a lot of the gay men that defend Cathal O'Searlaigh did so because if the public start examining his actions in Nepal then next they might start examining the actions of men grooming under 18s in some of the gay bars in Dublin and on Gaydar.

Inequality and power imbalances are fine it seems, as long as Norris and Co. are availing.

mattyboy20

It is not homophobic to criticize Cathal O searcaigh-that's pathetic. The man's a dirty pervert who took advantage of innocent young boys. Ask any gay person and they'll agree that he's a perve.

gumtree

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Norris Slams McGuinness

Presidential hopeful David Norris slams Martin McGuinness as SINN FÉIN had Agreed To Nominate Norris and pulled the Sword From Stone.

Mr Norris made no comment to reporters when asked about the matter outside his Dublin home shortly before 10pm, It is understood Mr Norris is to take legal action on the matter

hotmail.com

gumtree wrote: »

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Norris Slams McGuinness

Presidential hopeful David Norris slams Martin McGuinness as SINN FÉIN had Agreed To Nominate Norris and pulled the Sword From Stone.

Mr Norris made no comment to reporters when asked about the matter outside his Dublin home shortly before 10pm, It is understood Mr Norris is to take legal action on the matter

They broke a promise. Can you take legal action on that??

rainbow kirby

Don't resurrect 3 year old threads.