"Can gays be cured of being gay?” RTÉ issues apology over Tweet.

Lapin

RTÉ has apologised over a Tweet relating to the subject matter of a programme they were making with an undercover journalist covering a group that claims to be able to cure gay people.



From The Mirror -

A late night RTE radio show found itself at the centre of a social media storm tonight after tweeting “Can gays be cured of being gay?”.

RTE show ‘The God Slot’ posted the controversial question shortly before 4pm.

And several hours later hundreds took to Twitter to blast the show due to be hosted by Eileen Dunne tonight.

The tweet was removed shortly after 9pm and an apology was issued.

“Apologies if offended by a promo for @TheGodSlot tomorrow night The contributor refutes the value of any conversion therapy for gay people.”

An RTE spokeswoman explained that the tweet was meant to stir debate and not offend.

She explained: “The show involves an undercover journalist going to an organisation which claims to cure homosexuality.

“The journalist exposes the fact that it is not possible to convert homosexuals.”




I think its a storm in a teacup and the apology isn't warranted. It was a rhetorical editorial question based upon the ignorant belief that some religious people hold.

Those who called for an apology either don't get it or are too easily (and willing to be) offended.

Sulla Felix

Eh, the tweeted reply to some of the criticism was a bit more heartfelt than that warranted if it was a rhetorical question imo.

alchemist33

"Hundreds blasted the show" before they'd even seen it?!?

But I suppose that isn't surprising in Twitterland.

GoldFour4

Poorly phrased obviously but some people just love to use twitter to criticise every little thing. Not much of a story.

Artful_Badger

That actually is political correctness gone mad.

darkpagandeath

Can I be cured of being addicted to online Fps games ?

keith16

Sulla Felix wrote: »

Eh, the tweeted reply to some of the criticism was a bit more heartfelt than that warranted if it was a rhetorical question imo.

So what, the weight of the apology = how wrong they were? More like how scared they were.

Sarky

It was the title being criticised, not the show. Asking "Can gays be cured of being gay" paints homosexuality as a disease or something that needs fixing. We've known that "gay cures" are bollocks for at least 40 years, RTE is really not doing a good job convincing anyone it's current with this sort of silliness. It's the same as asking if being black can be cured. It's entirely the wrong way to go about discussing the evils of gay therapy, if that's what they're claiming it was about.

FreshKnickers

Can RTE be cured of being RTE?

Wacker The Attacker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3wFHEm33Aw

Sulla Felix

keith16 wrote: »

So what, the weight of the apology = how wrong they were? More like how scared they were.

No, this reply is more than a little defensive.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BeIceRkCYAApZVp.png

efb

You only cure diseases and ham IMHO

hfallada

Not even Ryanair tries to pull off this shock value tacky advertising any more. Why is RTE even doing a documentary on what Americans call "pray away the gay", when there is countless journals on how harmful it is? You can hardly expect an RTE "journalist" to produce a decent and accurate documentary on a sensitive topic, when they make a complete balls of simple topics.

P_1

Poorly phrased tweet but an interesting premise for a radio show. Conversion therapy sounds pretty barbaric so I guess an attempt to understand/debunk it is fairly noble.
Scratch that after seeing one of the replies from the account I can't exactly expect the show to be very impartial.

Having said that RTE haven't exactly been covering themselves in PR glory WRT the LGBT community between this and the John Waters legal letter inspired schenanigans over Brendan O'Carroll's tv show

Chazz Michael Michaels

Some questions are thought crime now.

enfant terrible

Sarky wrote: »

It was the title being criticised, not the show. Asking "Can gays be cured of being gay" paints homosexuality as a disease or something that needs fixing. We've known that "gay cures" are bollocks for at least 40 years. It's the same as asking if being black can be cured. It's entirely the wrong way to go about discussing the evils of gay therapy, if that's what they're claiming it was about.

Could they not argue its a defect in nature that could possible be changed?

Femme_Fatale

Sulla Felix wrote: »

No, this reply is more than a little defensive.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BeIceRkCYAApZVp.png

Lol, I've less sympathy now - that's straight out of the David Quinn Book of Sh1te, Tired Clichés.

Uriel.

It's grating the way society is developing. In my view theoonly way to deal with this "offended at anything" crowd is for organisations / people to stand up to them and not back down out of a fear of some backlash.

If a child gets sweet every time it cries. It'll never learn and keep crying.

Unfortunately, it'll never happen

Sarky

enfant terrible wrote: »

Could they not argue its a defect in nature that could possible be changed?

Bit late after painting all gay people as being sick and in need of treatment, don't you think?

J_E

Sarky wrote: »

It was the title being criticised, not the show. Asking "Can gays be cured of being gay" paints homosexuality as a disease or something that needs fixing. We've known that "gay cures" are bollocks for at least 40 years. It's the same as asking if being black can be cured. It's entirely the wrong way to go about discussing the evils of gay therapy, if that's what they're claiming it was about.

That's the problem I have with the title too. I only just saw this story now, but all this title seems to suggest is they just wanted the chirpy Breda O Briens of the nation to stir the pot and get viewing numbers.

Point is, there should never have been a debate here. Also funny, the people who will likely argue against it aren't gay in the first place...how could they ever understand in the same way?

Nothing to do with people being 'offended at everything'. Yes, I do take offense, because even having this argument suggests that I am somehow sick.

aidan_walsh

the John Waters legal letter inspired schenanigans over Brendan O'Carroll's tv show

John Waters would get himself a lot of new respect if he managed to get Mrs. Brown off the air.

Maximus Alexander

Can they be cured though?

*BRACE FOR IMPACT*

Edit: This post was a joke. I have come to realise that was not entirely obvious.

enfant terrible

Sarky wrote: »

Bit late after painting all gay people as being sick and in need of treatment, don't you think?

Is it that big a deal, if Louis Theroux did a documentary on "curing" gays would the BBC ban it?

Chazz Michael Michaels

Sarky wrote: »

Bit late after painting all gay people as being sick and in need of treatment, don't you think?

Who said that?

efb

I am not a fcuking defect

P_1

aidan_walsh wrote: »

John Waters would get himself a lot of new respect if he managed to get Mrs. Brown off the air.

Feck I think I got my annoying Brendans mixed up

Lapin

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Can they be cured though?

*BRACE FOR IMPACT*

Depends on whatever illness or ailment thay may have.

Just like yourself.

Uriel.

efb wrote: »

I am not a fcuking defect

I hate to break it you but you are....















....







....


Cos you is purple.

P_1

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Can they be cured though?

*BRACE FOR IMPACT*

Well if they have a nasty cold then I'd imagine so, if they have a terminal illness then sadly no

J_E

enfant terrible wrote: »

Is it that big a deal, if Louis Theroux did a documentary on "curing" gays would the BBC ban it?

For one, he wouldn't not call it something as abrasive as that, and he'd do it a hell of a lot classier than RTE ever could.

Karl Stein

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

Some questions are thought crime now.

It's a horribly loaded question which presumes that being gay is some sort of medical affliction. We're supposed to have moved on from that bullshit a few decades ago.

On another note, do people who are gay get annoyed at being called 'the gays' and 'gays'?

Sarky

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

Who said that?

The God Slot did, by asking "Can gay people be cured of being gay?". I did explain that earlier.

efb

Carlos Roca wrote: »

It's a horribly loaded question which presumes that being gay is some sort of medical affliction.

On another note, do people who are gay get annoyed at being called 'the gays' and 'gays'?

No

The_Valeyard

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Can I be cured of being addicted to online Fps games ?

Yes, give Battlefield 4 a go. The bugs will cure you pretty damn quick.

enfant terrible

Cydoniac wrote: »

For one, he wouldn't not call it something as abrasive as that, and he'd do it a hell of a lot classier than RTE ever could.

He would call it that to get attention for his program, he like controversy.

Chazz Michael Michaels

Sarky wrote: »

The God Slot did, by asking "Can gay people be cured of being gay?". I did explain that earlier.

No, they didn't. Go have a cup of tea.

generallyjack

Uriel. wrote: »

It's grating the way society is developing. In my view theoonly way to deal with this "offended at anything" crowd is for organisations / people to stand up to them and not back down out of a fear of some backlash.

If a child gets sweet every time it cries. It'll never learn and keep crying.

Unfortunately, it'll never happen

That is an unreasonable analogy. The LGBT community isn't asking for anything from society other than to be allowed to live in peace. We don't want more than our heterosexual and cisgender peers in terms of how the law and society treat us.

Chazz Michael Michaels

Carlos Roca wrote: »

It's a horribly loaded question which presumes that being gay is some sort of medical affliction. We're supposed to have moved on from that bullshit a few decades ago.

On another note, do people who are gay get annoyed at being called 'the gays' and 'gays'?

Yes, it is a stupid question. Just like "Can straight white men be cured of being straight white men?"

However, I doubt the latter would create such hysteria. It was a poorly phrased question. That's all. Move on.

J_E

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

Yes, it is a stupid question. Just like "Can straight white men be cured of being straight white men?"

However, I doubt the latter would create such hysteria. It was a poorly phrased question. That's all. Move on.

Of course the latter wouldn't create hysteria, because it's not even comparative. Really bad point, to be honest.

That's along the lines of 'why don't we have straight pride'

enfant terrible

Cydoniac wrote: »

Of course the latter wouldn't create hysteria, because it's not even comparative. Really bad point, to be honest.

Can Christians be cured of their belief in Christ?

Is that debate allowed on the air?, who decides what we're allowed to discuss?

Chazz Michael Michaels

Cydoniac wrote: »

Of course the latter wouldn't create hysteria, because it's not even comparative. Really bad point, to be honest.

That's along the lines of 'why don't we have straight pride'

They are, its just some people choose to be offended by stupid questions. Is there a cure for that?

As an aside, why not have straight pride?

J_E

enfant terrible wrote: »

Can Christians be cured of their belief in Christ?

Is that debate allowed on the air?, who decides what we're allowed to discuss?

It's similarly offensive to Catholics, but you're missing the point here. The issue of gay rights and gay identity is only at the tail end of a fragile 2 decades. Remember, in the 90's this was something that was outright illegal. Had the title been phrased more openly, it probably wouldn't have faced the backlash it did, but the title clearly has an agenda going, probably no reasonable or balanced argument going to happen, and it's just another slap in the face for those of us who have to hear this **** every day in some form or another. RTE are already on shaky ground here.

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

As an aside, why not have straight pride?

:rolleyes:

Chazz Michael Michaels

Cydoniac wrote: »

It's similarly offensive to Catholics, but you're missing the point here. The issue of gay rights and gay identity is only at the tail end of a fragile 2 decades. Remember, in the 90's this was something that was outright illegal. Had the title been phrased more openly, it probably wouldn't have faced the backlash it did, but the title clearly has an agenda going, probably no reasonable or balanced argument going to happen, and it's just another slap in the face for those of us who have to hear this **** every day in some form or another. RTE are already on shaky ground here.


:rolleyes:

Good response. I know why.

J_E

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

Good response. I know why.

Look up Stonewall Riots. Ask yourself why straight people might not need a commemoration day for being straight.

enfant terrible

Cydoniac wrote: »

It's similarly offensive to Catholics, but you're missing the point here. The issue of gay rights and gay identity is only at the tail end of a fragile 2 decades. Remember, in the 90's this was something that was outright illegal. Had the title been phrased more openly, it probably wouldn't have faced the backlash it did, but the title clearly has an agenda going, probably no reasonable or balanced argument going to happen, and it's just another slap in the face for those of us who have to hear this **** every day in some form or another. RTE are already on shaky ground here.


:rolleyes:

So condemn the debate before even listening to it, and you think the program makers are ignorant?

So your saying we can have the debate on Christianity but not on homosexuality, thanks for clearing that up, you decide what we can discuss.

Shakti

enfant terrible wrote: »

Can Christians be cured of their belief in Christ?

Is that debate allowed on the air?, who decides what we're allowed to discuss?

Dawkins

Chazz Michael Michaels

Cydoniac wrote: »

Look up Stonewall Riots. Ask yourself why straight people might not need a commemoration day for being straight.

So pride is only reserved for victims?

J_E

enfant terrible wrote: »

So condemn the debate before even listening to it, and you think the program makers are ignorant?

So your saying we can have the debate on Christianity but not on homosexuality, thanks for clearing that up, you decide what we can discuss.

Thanks for twisting my words. Not going to get into a fluster and inevitable thread lock that follows. If you can't see the point I made, I'm not going to be the one able to help you see it.

enfant terrible

Cydoniac wrote: »

Thanks for twisting my words. Not going to get into a fluster and inevitable thread lock that follows. If you can't see the point I made, I'm not going to be the one able to help you see it.

You said "probably no reasonable or balanced argument going to happen"

Didn't twist your words at all, you haven't heard the program yet but are dismissing it as bigoted.

Femme_Fatale

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

why not have straight pride?

That's a new one. And true, I really feel the way I struggled for decades to be accepted and not abused for my heterosexuality deserves a pride day.

Chazz Michael Michaels

So, just to get this straight, in a Utopian world, no one would be permitted to ask this question?