rdwight wrote: » No, not as you thought. You thought he was referring to the "people you get up early" quote
blanch152 wrote: » But he didn't say that it is great about gay rights being achieved, he said that the then Taoiseach could do what he liked in bed, drawing attention in an inappropriate way to the then Taoiseach's sexual orientation, low-level dog-whistle homophobia. Let's hope he does the decent thing and apologises to the Tanaiste. Glad to see that the excuses of this morning have now been dropped. We were told it was about getting up early in the morning, now it is about gay rights. The brass neck of this posting is incredible.
rdwight wrote: » Stanley's response to a gay party leader being elected is to make a gratuitous reference to sexual activity and Francie et al are deaf to the dog whistle.
Bowie wrote: » Are they? Good for them. I would have assumed they were. Are nurses a political football now? Try knock anyone supports them? Do you not support SF on this?
Amirani wrote: » Look, I've no skin in the game here in the stupid arguments blanch and you seem to have constantly. I have been involved in LGBT campaigning for a long time, and have witnessed and been subjected to various slurs and off-handed comments that are then sometimes dressed up as not being homophobic. I don't expect you to understand what it's like. It might just be "faux outrage" to you, but making comments about what somebody does in bed when they are gay is a comment with homophobic roots, and is disparaging. It's such a common trope, from lots of people, Stanley is hardly the first and won't be the last. Fine if you don't consider it to be such, but the majority of people in the LGBT community would rather such insinuations not be made. I've no problem giving him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't mean it to be a homophobic attack, but it's not something that should be said.
Bowie wrote: » Once again you are making stuff up and then giving out about it. I gave him the benefit of the doubt. You tried spin claims of racism yesterday now back to homophobia today. It's a lack of respect using these things to try score political points. You should be ashamed.
rdwight wrote: » What I'm knocking is the hypocrisy of supporting them down here but not in the North
FrancieBrady wrote: » Yes. And the later statement by Varadkar was only mentioned after that. Are you saying it couldn't have also been referencing Leo's gaff about early risers? Because it could be about that too. No problem saying he was referencing Leo's speech as new leader. It wasn't homophobic and was reasonably explained.
rdwight wrote: » Stanley made no reference to "early risers" quote in his defence of tweet in IT article you linked to.
FrancieBrady wrote: » 'Gratuitous reference to sexual activity'??? OMG!! Someone mentioned SEX. You sound like Mary whitehouse.
blanch152 wrote: » It is not my fault that you don't understand the nature of dog-whistle homophobia and racism and are happy to support those that engage in it. It is a problem on here that many have drawn attention to. I will never be ashamed of calling out those that engage in it and will continue to do so.
blanch152 wrote: » I am beginning to understand why so many young people are voting Sinn Fein if they have been convinced as you clearly have been by what is essentially propaganda.
On a different note, your callous attitude to human life as displayed in your last sentence is shocking and disappointing, especially for someone who claims to support human rights. The right attitude in the 1960s and 1970s was taken by John Hume and Seamus Mallon who were the ones who had the vast support of the nationalist population.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » Young peoples' support for Sinn Fein has nothing whatsoever to do with the Troubles, I 100% guarantee you this beyond a flicker of a doubt. It's about the cost of living. Every poll taken in the last two years has reflected as much, so you don't have to take my word for it. It has literally nothing to do with Northern Ireland, for young people in the Republic self-preservation has massively eclipsed any other issues. I absolutely do not have a callous attitude to human life. I do have a callous attitude to the lives specifically of the willing, complicit agents of an apartheid regime. They can rot in hell as far as I'm concerned. Would you describe Michael Collins as having a callous attitude to human life? How about Dev? How about Nelson Mandela? How about any number of historical figures who fought against oppression by targeting the organisations enforcing that oppression? The RUC and Trouble-era British Army as organisations were beyond redemption. They marked themselves out as valid targets by choosing to enforce an apartheid regime and to stand with those responsible for discrimination and repression. Any such organisation is a legitimate target in a time of war.
blanch152 wrote: » This is the problem. Posters like you and Bowie think it is funny to refer to Mary Whitehouse in this context, or quote the loyalist who called Varadkar an Indian, or adopt a username for a laugh. It just isn't funny, it is offensive. You might call it "faux outrage woke stuff" and probably claim that it is locker-room banter or some such but it is not, it is low-level dog-whistle racism and homophobia and unacceptable.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Again, I am taking what the man said himself into account: He meant it as 'Great that gay rights have been achieved, what about etc etc'. If you want his scalp over that, fair enough, go ahead. I think it would do a dis-service to those fighting against genuine homophobia as a lot of the (no offence to you or any genuine campaigners) faux outrage woke stuff does. I have no doubt if those people go after him they'll get their man. But there you go.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I said I accept that. And that he could have been referencing that.
blanch152 wrote: » You have absolutely no idea of what life in Northern Ireland was like if you compare it to apartheid South Africa. The difference is vast.
Amirani wrote: » I don't think it's a resigning matter, it's a small ambiguous comment. Much of the fanfare is people trying to drag a bit more out of the previous Twitter story. That said, his comments in relation to it were quite odd. Why not acknowledge that the Tweet may have been misconstrued, explain what he meant (the getting up early thing) and then say that he had no intention or would not make homophobic remarks? Instead he starts talking about freedom of speech and how his track record for gay rights speaks for itself? Really could've handled this better.
Mr Stanley said that short tweets can be “misinterpreted”. “’Yippee’ meant I celebrate the fact we got so far in terms of the rights for gay people.
rdwight wrote: » I'm beginning to get the same feeling I get watching a Trump press conference. Next, you'll be asking me to prove that Stanley's tweet wasn't at least partially a reference to the "early risers" quote. This is even though he himself said (in the the article you linked to) that he was referring to gay rights. In defending his tweet he made no reference to the "early risers" quote. Stop digging Francie
Bowie wrote: » Good man. I support the nurses. If any party does, then I like that party for that. It's really simple and helps deciding come election time.
rdwight wrote: » So I presume you won't be supporting them in the North
Bowie wrote: » Never have. How would I do that? I've supported the DUP as much as I've supported SF. What an odd question. You never answered, would you support SF on their support for nurses?
rdwight wrote: » Yes I would. But not their selective virtue-signaling prominence on picket lines.
Hqrry113 wrote: » Taoiseach Micheál Martin said he was “shocked and dismayed” by a controversial tweet sent by a Sinn Féin TD that referenced IRA attacks during the War of Independence and the Troubles. ...... Do you really think the tweet was all that bad or is Michael just point scoring?
Hqrry113 wrote: » What do you think was so disgusting about it?
Shelga wrote: » Seriously, how dumb is the average Sinn Fein TD? Brian Stanley is 62, uses text speak, can't string a sentence together and not only does he hold views that are both homophobic and sympathetic to terrorists, he's so intellectually vapid (read: stupid) that he doesn't even know better than to spout those views all over Twitter. :rolleyes: What does Mary Lou do? Absolutely nothing. A zero-tolerance policy from her on issues relating to terrorism sympathisers might do something to make people like me ever consider voting for them. But she's happy to stick with the votes of gullible nationalists and not go beyond that base. I'm in my early 30s and desperate to buy a house like half the country, but how people think SF will do anything to improve their lives is totally beyond me. Look at the moral and intellectual calibre of this shower of fools. They are just a complete embarrassment.
