Openly gay T.D.s -- article in today's Irish Times

St._Andalou

There's an interesting article in today's Irish Times on John Lyons and Dominic Hannigan, two newly elected, openly gay T.D.s

It shouldn’t be news that the Dáil now has two openly gay members, but it is. So how do John Lyons and Dominic Hannigan view their roles?

IN 2011 IS IT A STORY or not that two openly gay TDs have been elected to the Dáil? It shouldn’t be, but it is. Homosexuality was not decriminalised here until 1993. So if the newly elected Labour politicians Dominic Hannigan and John Lyons had belonged to a different generation, they would not have been able to be open about their sexuality when campaigning for office.

“The last thing in the world that I want is to be stereotyped as a gay TD,” says Lyons, who stood in Dublin North West. “I hope people see me as a competent young person, with new ideas, who is energetic and capable. But the fact that homosexuality was still against the law in the early 1990s says a lot about things back then, and how Ireland has changed.

LGiamani

This is great news I wish both of them the best I hope they can bring a bit more to civil partnership and LGBT right even if they are small steps.

L.Jenkins

I wonder how many of the right wingers will be dismissive of gay rights and get away with, or even have the neck now to make a comment in passing from now on. It's great to see that we have some way by electing to openly gay TDs in the first place.

SugarHigh

It shouldn’t be news that the Dáil now has two openly gay members, but it is

What a dumb statement coming from the people who decide what makes the news. Neither candidate made being gay any part of their campaign so why do the media even mention it?

ninty9er

It was in the Sun* last week, got plenty of web coverage. They both commented for the paper and there was no indication (as might be expected of the Sun*) that the article was a pisstake.

I don't think it should be a major issue, but I actually think it's a big deal in terms of societal progression.

Plus John Lyons is a looker



*May have been the Star or Mirror, but was a red top in any case.

Annasopra

SugarHigh wrote: »

What a dumb statement coming from the people who decide what makes the news. Neither candidate made being gay any part of their campaign so why do the media even mention it?

why shouldn't the media mention it?

bigpoppa

Never understand this concept of highlighting sexuality as if it's important Equality is something that will only come when such things are not mentioned.

Annasopra

bigpoppa wrote: »

Never understand this concept of highlighting sexuality as if it's important Equality is something that will only come when such things are not mentioned.

So people will be treated equally when everything to do with their lives are hidden away, kept as a secret and generally treated as something to be ashamed of not discussed?

bigpoppa

Everyone deserves a right to be treated equally of course. This is an issue if they are not. Same sex marriage discrimination is an issue. Suicide is an issue. The economy is an issue.

Tackle the issues but why make a huge point about highlighting the fact a TD is gay? So what? Jump up and down about the fact this person is gay.

Apart from bigots and homophobes people don't give a **** if people are gay for the most part. Why not just try treat homosexuality as normal rather than continually trying to make it out as more important than anything else to do with someone? Is this guy going to make a good politician or what?

You will never move forward with this self marginalisation. Straight people dont care and are bored of this flag waving tedium

SugarHigh

Johnnymcg wrote: »

why shouldn't the media mention it?

Because it's completely irrelevant to how they will do their job.
It may influence some of their decisions regarding gay marriage but straight people can also hold those views and it wouldn't be front page news.

There is no reason why these two politicians should get front page attention simply for being gay.

Johnnymcg wrote: »

So people will be treated equally when everything to do with their lives are hidden away, kept as a secret and generally treated as something to be ashamed of not discussed?

Who said anything about hiding them away. Simply not mentioning something which should be irrelevant is not the same as hiding it away. It's ok to mention that someone is gay but why does it need to be front page news?

It simply doesn't need to be discussed and it's only as big of a deal as the media makes it(which seems to be a lot) which is why it's hilarious when the media then goes on to say "it shouldn't be news".

letsbehonest

John Lyons gets my vote any day!:D

40040D

ninty9er wrote: »

Plus John Lyons is a looker

Yeah +1 one there for sure

Aard

Much as I hate to admit it, I do think this is a big deal. I'm glad the Times reported it, along with that red top; it'll mean that for a few readers, they will have to read the word "gay". I am that cynical. With every instance of it being mentioned in the news, it makes up for all the times that people expressly go out of their way to euphemistically circumvent the idea of two guys or girls being with each other. These two guys are, unfortunately, poster boys for equality. Stopping a newspaper reporting it isn't gonna stop people from talking about it -- and thanks to this article's positively, maybe when somebody next broaches the topic of the "gay" TD, they'll take a positive note too (even if it's in fear that others don't hold their old-fashioned point of view any more).

Annasopra

There are other gay TDs in the Dail who are afraid to be openly gay - why should people be afraid to be open about themselves? that is more or less the logical end of how your arguments follow through sugarhigh and bigpoppa. And bigpoppa I cannot see how Lyons or Hannigan or marginalising themselves at all - The gay TDs who can't or won't come out are the ones marginalising themselves

Beruthiel

SugarHigh wrote: »

Because it's completely irrelevant to how they will do their job.

Yes, it is completely irrelevant. But, it's also fantastic!
It shows how open and accepting Irish society is becoming.
It reaches a wider audience and makes things much easier for others.
I should also think, for someone still trying to come to terms with who they are, it can only help for them to see such public figures.

gcgirl

I remember when I first heard Dominic Hannigan topped the pole in Meath east, the enormous feeling of pride I felt it was amazing even thinking about it now makes me a little emotional

SugarHigh

Beruthiel wrote: »

Yes, it is completely irrelevant. But, it's also fantastic!
It shows how open and accepting Irish society is becoming.
It reaches a wider audience and makes things much easier for others.
I should also think, for someone still trying to come to terms with who they are, it can only help for them to see such public figures.

Every time a new gay person appear in the public eye we have to go through the same nonsense of patting them on the back for simply being gay. You shouldn't be rewarded or congratulated for your sexuality. It's not x-factor why does he need a "story"?

gcgirl wrote: »

I remember when I first heard Dominic Hannigan topped the pole in Meath east, the enormous feeling of pride I felt it was amazing even thinking about it now makes me a little emotional

Why would you personally feel proud?

Beruthiel

SugarHigh wrote: »

Every time a new gay person appear in the public eye we have to go through the same nonsense of patting them on the back for simply being gay. You shouldn't be rewarded or congratulated for your sexuality. It's not x-factor why does he need a "story"?
Why would you personally feel proud?

Me personally? Because I'm old enough to remember back when being gay was never, ever mentioned.
My grandmother had two gay sons, she never knew that.

It has taken us long enough to drag ourselves out of the dark ages, some people in this country still live there. Constantly exposing them to stories like this may eventually make them, at the very least, more accepting.

It is not that we congratulate these people for being gay, but rather, congratulating all of us as a population, for having moved on so far that for someone to be able to admit that they are gay does not hinder their progress in society.

ztoical

SugarHigh wrote: »

Every time a new gay person appear in the public eye we have to go through the same nonsense of patting them on the back for simply being gay.

Because even today there are hundreds of young gay people living in fear for 'simply being gay'. I've lost count of the number of friends over the years who were beaten up for, in the view of their attacters, 'acting gay' - some ended up badly shaken, some ended up in hospital and one ended up in the morgue.

Having papers highlight that there are openly gay people working in the highest positions in the country sends a positive message to those young people that their lives are not over just because they are gay. Young people who think they're options are either come out and loose family and friends and ruin possible potential careers or don't come out, be unhappy but keep those around you happy because your doing whats expected.

Yes it shouldn't be important if someone is gay or straight, male or female or what religion they are and in the future one would hope that it isn't but we have not reached that point in our society were we are able to do that yet.

ongarboy

Beruthiel wrote: »

Me personally? Because I'm old enough to remember back when being gay was never, ever mentioned.
My grandmother had two gay sons, she never knew that.

It has taken us long enough to drag ourselves out of the dark ages, some people in this country still live there. Constantly exposing them to stories like this may eventually make them, at the very least, more accepting.

It is not that we congratulate these people for being gay, but rather, congratulating all of us as a population, for having moved on so far that for someone to be able to admit that they are gay does not hinder their progress in society.

What a wonderful way of articulating why this is an achievement for everybody (GLBT and straight). I agree wholeheartedly! Thanks Beruthiel for expressing it so well!

Louisevb

The fact that a politician is gay is totally irrelevant. Being gay is a only a part of who you are and has no effect on anyone's ability to do the job they were elected to do as is being transgender. Neither should being coloured, disabled, a pensioner or a traveler make any difference... It's about time the media realised this and moved on to stuff that matters.

Alfla

Firstly, I'd say that the act of electing two gay people is of societal importance and worthy of reporting. Remember, newspapers are not just an amalgam of the day's happenings but a record for history. For instance, can you imagine if not one newspaper in Barack Obama's entire campaign had mentioned that he's black - that would have been bowing to political correctness, not the other way around. If something happens for the first time, and it's of significance, it gets reported. That's news, people.

My second point, however, is that it is of significance that these people are elected right now. They are being elected to represent a government that openly discriminates against them in a legal manner. They form part of the body that controls that (and yes, obviously, the judicial system is involved blah blah) and may have the ability to change it. Even if you ignore the societal importance of what's happening, it's still of particular note to have people denied rights elected to have direct influence over those rights.

Anyway, that's my two cents (inflation dependent) for now.