Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Calls for Minister for Children Roderic O'Gorman to resign..

Options
1…7891012

Comments

  • Options
    #332
    Grudaire
    Registered Users Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭Grudaire


    ronivek wrote: »
    So just to be clear:

    O'Gorman was pictured next to Tatchell in 2018 at a Pride March whilst also surrounded by thousands of other people.

    Tatchell wrote to a comments section of a Newspaper in 1997 expressing some controversial opinions about children and sex.

    Therefore O'Gorman clearly must agree with Tatchell's opinions expressed in 1997 and should resign immediately.

    Do I have that about right?

    I think this needs to be repeated every couple of pages... I mean the allegations/insinuations keep getting repeated.


  • Options
    #333
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    sabat wrote: »
    I had already forgotten about it-a mod even said to stop talking about it- and given the guy the benefit of the doubt until it became clear yesterday that a co-ordinated strategy was taking place off-thread amongst certain posters and that the strategy included "keep talking about the map thing; it makes them sound mental."
    So I had a closer look to decide for myself and concluded that on the balance of probability he was being an edgelord exhibitionist who knew exactly what he was saying. Nothing more to say about it really; I'm not going to change any minds here.

    Ya, no he wasn't and you've entered qanon territory... It more indicates that you've got pretty warped ideas of gay people and read too much into a person eating a cucumber...


  • Options
    #334
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,662 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    So the outrage is fuelled by some kind of "link" with Tatchell - a tenuous one to say the least, but enough to get the homophobes around here frothing at the mouth - thread closed


  • Options
    #335
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    Minister for Children distances himself from Peter Tatchell and says he is subject to far right disinformation campaign

    As per new article in the Irish Times:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/minister-for-children-rejects-ridiculous-online-claims-over-paedophilia-1.4297259?mode=amp&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

    Basically he says he didn't know about the letter re age of consent and if he did would have reconsidered taking the picture.

    Will that be the end of the matter?

    Edit: would appreciate if a mod could tidy up the title and correct my typo


  • Options
    #336
    ronivek
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭ronivek


    Roderic O'Gorman posted a statement to Twitter: https://twitter.com/rodericogorman/status/1280085583897993216?s=20

    Slightly disappointed he felt the need to respond but hopefully that will be the end of it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #337
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1280089045960396800?s=19


  • Options
    #338
    JohnnyFlash
    Registered Users Posts: 7,055 ✭✭✭JohnnyFlash


    It was Gemma O’Doherty/Jim Corr sorts trying to make this into a thing. Alongside some of the more nationalistic members of the online SF army. Those two groups have a lot in common


  • Options
    #339
    keano_afc
    Registered Users Posts: 8,711 ✭✭✭keano_afc


    Lumping everyone who raised this as "far-right" and homphobic is pretty pathetic. Straight from the Hazel Chu school of diplomacy.


  • Options
    #340
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    ronivek wrote: »
    Roderic O'Gorman posted a statement to Twitter: https://twitter.com/rodericogorman/status/1280085583897993216?s=20

    Slightly disappointed he felt the need to respond but hopefully that will be the end of it.

    Well if he is now saying (as the media reports suggest) that he wouldn't have had his photo taken with Peter Tatchell had he known about the controversial letter/views and that he (the minister) rejects these views and only has a tenuous connection with Tatchell (only met him once at a March) I think it should be the end of the matter. I do think that he was right to comment.

    What his comments will do is make a problem for others who have a deeper connection with Tatchell (such as SF having him speak at an event, I doubt they are the only ones who have had dealings). If the Minister for Children, a member of government, feels that he shouldn't have had his picture taken with Tatchell and only did so as he was unaware of the controversial views then it will follow that everyone else, and every organisation, who have had associations with Tatchell will be similarly questioned.


  • Options
    #341
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    keano_afc wrote: »
    Lumping everyone who raised this as "far-right" and homphobic is pretty pathetic. Straight from the Hazel Chu school of diplomacy.

    It was a smear campaign that involved trawling through every image he was in. Tatchell has met loads of politicians in the UK and Ireland over the years. (Including likes of Theresa May).

    Other additional parts of the smear campaign included renditions of paintings that were tweeted that were apparently satan(was actually Saturn). An image that read "map porn" was treated as a shout out to pedophiles. It was all conspiratorial nonsense that read like qanon. It attracted the far right and homophobes alike.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #342
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    JohnnyFlash wrote: »
    It was Gemma O’Doherty/Jim Corr sorts trying to make this into a thing. Alongside some of the more nationalistic members of the online SF army. Those two groups have a lot in common

    One of the ways the likes of them get attention is when they talk about things some people perceive as being ignored by "main stream media".

    The role of the media is to cover things in a sensible manner, by arriving so late the far right mob (and to be fair ordinary people raised some concerns too, although it is clear that the usual suspects were the most vigorous and energetic in shouting about it) will claim this as a victory and that they forced the media to look at this

    And to be fair I think a Minister being photographed with a controversial figure and saying he is legendary is worth a question or two from a journalist about it. Had the media covered this from the outset it would be a two paragraph non story but because the Twitter mob have done the running on it for many days now it is massive news and has empowered the far right (or at least they will feel it has)


  • Options
    #343
    JohnnyFlash
    Registered Users Posts: 7,055 ✭✭✭JohnnyFlash


    John Hutton wrote: »
    One of the ways the likes of them get attention is when they talk about things some people perceive as being ignored by "main stream media".

    The role of the media is to cover things in a sensible manner, by arriving so late the far right mob (and to be fair ordinary people raised some concerns too, although it is clear that the usual suspects were the most vigorous and energetic in shouting about it) will claim this as a victory and that they forced the media to look at this

    And to be fair I think a Minister being photographed with a controversial figure and saying he is legendary is worth a question or two from a journalist about it. Had the media covered this from the outset it would be a two paragraph non story but because the Twitter mob have done the running on it for many days now it is massive news and has empowered the far right (or at least they will feel it has)

    Having a few members of their pitifully small jerk circle thanking their tweets isn’t empowering. It just shows them up for the losers they are. Men who live their lives thinking twitter is somehow important, and that being followed by some knob with an Irish flag as his twitter profile pic makes them a patriot.


  • Options
    #344
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Another thread
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Options
    #345
    the immortals
    Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭the immortals


    He was hoping it would blow over that's why he took so long to respond, I don't believe for a second he knew nothing about some of thatchell s quotes or interviews, Ireland is in a place now where any criticism or questions asked of anyone who's gay or an ethnic minority can just be accused of being the far right, homophobic, Racist etc, it's a great way to shut people up


  • Options
    #346
    1800_Ladladlad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,352 ✭✭✭1800_Ladladlad


    There was no attack on his sexual orientation. He's the minister for children for Christ sake. He associated with a man openly advocating paedophilia who thinks it's ok for 9year olds to consent and to be abused! How long did it take for him to come out this statement? No doubt he has attempted to turn himself into the victim and spun it into to into a homophobic attack. He's cleared it now and set his side of the record straight. The situation is pathetic.


  • Options
    #347
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    JohnnyFlash wrote: »
    Having a few members of their pitifully small jerk circle thanking their tweets isn’t empowering. It just shows them up for the losers they are. Men who live their lives thinking twitter is somehow important, and that being followed by some knob with an Irish flag as his twitter profile pic makes them a patriot.

    I agree but the way this has turned out won't discourage them it will do the opposite and I fully expect others with associations with Tatchell to be questioned about it

    And if a govt minister feels it necessary to condemn Tatchells views and basically say he shouldn't have taken the picture then it will be very hard for others to avoid commenting on it


  • Options
    #348
    VillageIdiot71
    Registered Users Posts: 578 ✭✭✭VillageIdiot71


    It's good that he has commented. The fact that he says he would not have had the photo taken if he was aware of what Tatchell has written in the past shows that concerns expressed by many were justified, and cannot be dismissed as homophobia. He should be more magnamous in accepting it is the public comment that alerted him to his error.

    Apart from that, there's a few non-trivial differences in emphasis between his statement and how that statement is quoted. For example, the Irish Times says
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/minister-for-children-rejects-ridiculous-online-claims-over-paedophilia-1.4297259

    I absolutely don’t share his views on those points and I’m glad that he’s since clarified exactly what he meant there.
    His statement says
    I’m glad that he’s since clarified and explained what is being alleged isn't his view.
    He shouldn't be leaving these ambiguities, as they only give the issue more mileage. Either

    Tatchell has certain views, and the Minister doesn't share them OR
    Tatchell's views have been misrepresented, and the Minister accepts Tatchell's explanation.

    Like, what does his statement amount to? A small group of right wing people have criticised him for endorsing Tatchell, while misrepresenting Tatchell's views. However, the Minister says he doesn't agree with Tatchell's actual views and wouldn't have endorsed him if he knew what they were.

    Does he make a habit of endorsing people he knows so little about? Its going to be a case study on how to respond to a controversy, and give it legs.


  • Options
    #349
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users Posts: 4,721 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    the immortals wrote: »
    He was hoping it would blow over that's why he took so long to respond, I don't believe for a second he knew nothing about some of thatchell s quotes or interviews, Ireland is in a place now where any criticism or questions asked of anyone who's gay or an ethnic minority can just be accused of being the far right, homophobic, Racist etc, it's a great way to shut people up

    Well when the actual people who are starting these controversies, that is Gemma is clearly homophobic I don't think it's such a crazy accusation to say it was motivated by homophobia.


  • Options
    #350
    dan1895
    Registered Users Posts: 4,597 ✭✭✭dan1895


    jam_mac_jam wrote: »
    Well when the actual people who are starting these controversies, that is Gemma is clearly homophobic I don't think it's such a crazy accusation to say it was motivated by homophobia.

    Was just about to say. Those on Twitter shouting about this were the same who spout other homophobic nonsense.

    Those shouting loudest on boards about it were the usual "I'm no fan of Gemma, but...." crowd.


  • Options
    #351
    John Hutton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭John Hutton


    Gatling wrote: »
    Another thread

    Im sorry I looked for another thread but couldn't find any. I had read one previously but it seems to have been deleted, which is fair enough I suppose on the absence of mainstream media coverage and comment. So I do think that this thread about an article in the paper of record, with comments by the Indo's editor, and a statement from the Minister himself, is a little different than those posted before.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #352
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It was a smear campaign that involved trawling through every image he was in

    Its worth pointing out that it was the "progressive" left who invented this game of trawling through people's social media accounts trying to find "slip ups" in order to cancel people.

    Gonna have to post the Jonathan Pie video again;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5TVLEaqqdI


  • Options
    #353
    dan1895
    Registered Users Posts: 4,597 ✭✭✭dan1895


    John Hutton wrote: »
    Im sorry I looked for another thread but couldn't find any. I had read one previously but it seems to have been deleted, which is fair enough I suppose on the absence of mainstream media coverage and comment. So I do think that this thread about an article in the paper of record, with comments by the Indo's editor, and a statement from the Minister himself, is a little different than those posted before.

    It was closed by mods as the links to Tatchell were weak.


  • Options
    #354
    dan1895
    Registered Users Posts: 4,597 ✭✭✭dan1895


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Its worth pointing out that it was the "progressive" left who invented this game of trawling through people's social media accounts trying to find "slip ups" in order to cancel people.

    Gonna have to post the Jonathan Pie video again;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5TVLEaqqdI

    Ah good old whataboutery.


  • Options
    #355
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users Posts: 4,721 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Its worth pointing out that it was the "progressive" left who invented this game of trawling through people's social media accounts trying to find "slip ups" in order to cancel people.

    Gonna have to post the Jonathan Pie video again;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5TVLEaqqdI

    It's wrong when either side do it. Not sure it matters who started it.


  • Options
    #356
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    dan1895 wrote: »
    Ah good old whataboutery.
    you dont seem to know what that term means.


  • Options
    #357
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    jam_mac_jam wrote: »
    It's wrong when either side do it. Not sure it matters who started it.
    i think it kind of matters. its a nasty bad faith thing to do but it was invented by the "good guys" and is now being used against their own. there are lessons to be learned.


  • Options
    #358
    dan1895
    Registered Users Posts: 4,597 ✭✭✭dan1895


    Yes I do


  • Options
    #359
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users Posts: 4,721 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    i think it kind of matters. its a nasty bad faith thing to do but it was invented by the "good guys" and is now being used against their own. there are lessons to be learned.

    The lesson of not doing it? I can agree with you if that's your point.

    The pathetic witch hunts need to stop.


  • Options
    #360
    Grudaire
    Registered Users Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭Grudaire


    1800_Ladladlad wrote: »
    There was no attack on his sexual orientation. He's the minister for children for Christ sake. He associated with a man openly advocating paedophilia who thinks it's ok for 9year olds to consent and to be abused! How long did it take for him to come out this statement? No doubt he has attempted to turn himself into the victim and spun it into to into a homophobic attack. He's cleared it now and set his side of the record straight. The situation is pathetic.

    Tatchell has distanced himself from those comments.

    This entire furore presupposes that Tatchell is how you describe above.. And if that holds, then we can go through everyone who tatchell has had pictures with over the last 20 years instead of witch hunting O'Gorman, and reverse engineering a controversy to suit.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #361
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 8,941 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    the immortals wrote: »
    Ireland is in a place now where any criticism or questions asked of anyone who's gay or an ethnic minority can just be accused of being the far right, homophobic, Racist etc, it's a great way to shut people up

    There’s a certain irony in complaining that the accusations of homophobia were just to shut people up, when the whole thing that started this - casting aspersions on someone because they had their photo taken beside someone else who expressed an opinion about the age of consent - is exactly the thing that will prevent people from even bringing up the topic of the age of consent for years to come.

    Debate on this matter has been completely shut down by those who yell, or infer, “paedo supporter” not even at those who bring it up, but those who merely have a casual connection to those who do so.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement