babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » UK: Tory Chief Recants Anti-gay Attitudes, But...

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: UK: Tory Chief Recants Anti-gay Attitudes, But...
Crippled_Newsie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7024

posted 13 February 2006 08:53 AM      Profile for Crippled_Newsie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
BBC:
quote:
The Thatcher government's failure to openly accept gay people was wrong, Conservative chairman Francis Maude, has told a gay news website.
Mr Maude, whose brother Charles died from the HIV virus in 1993, said the attitude prompted the "promiscuous" activity among homosexuals at the time.

He told the PinkNews.co.uk website he now regretted voting to ban councils from promoting homosexuality.

The Section 28 legislation, made law in the late 1980s, was repealed in 2003.

Mr Maude, MP for Horsham, said his decision was "in hindsight a mistake, I voted for it, I was a minister".

He added: "We've been seen for a long time as a party which hasn't been very open to gay people. That's wrong."

Asked if it was morally wrong, he answered: "Yes, totally."
...
[H]e told the website the Thatcher government's attitude at the time had not helped the gay scene.

"The gay scene in London in the 1980s was quite aggressively promiscuous and I think if society generally and the government I served in had been more willing to recognise gay people then there would have been less of that problem."


Lovely that he knows he was wrong, but where is this guy getting the idea that government policy is what dictates the extent to which (and the frequency with which) gay people sleep with one another?


From: It's all about the thumpa thumpa. | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 13 February 2006 09:05 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Section 28 banned any safer sex information in schools or other government sponsored institutions. Perhaps that's what he's trying to say?

Or he may actually think that people had lots of unsafe sex to make up for the hurt of being unloved by Margaret Thatcher.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Crippled_Newsie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7024

posted 13 February 2006 09:13 AM      Profile for Crippled_Newsie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RealityBites:
Or he may actually think that people had lots of unsafe sex to make up for the hurt of being unloved by Margaret Thatcher.

Yes, you may have something there. The withheld love of the Iron Lady must've had homos hurling themselves into each other's arms like horny lemmings.


From: It's all about the thumpa thumpa. | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 13 February 2006 05:13 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The withheld love of the Iron Lady...


Well, considering the alternatives... *shudder*


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 13 February 2006 11:24 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RealityBites:
Section 28 banned any safer sex information in schools or other government sponsored institutions. Perhaps that's what he's trying to say?

Or he may actually think that people had lots of unsafe sex to make up for the hurt of being unloved by Margaret Thatcher.


Still, Francis Maude has done what Ed Schreyer could not, hasn't he?

(although I can't for the life of me work out what the 'promiscuous' bit is about)


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 February 2006 12:11 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
He has a point. Driving an activity underground is the surest way to make it unsafe (or certainly less safe). Consider drugs as the perfect analogy. Alcohol is legally regulated and is generally considered a socially acceptable drink. Society can largely absorb the impact alcoholism has, in the aggregate, although individuals and families clearly may experience heartbreak over it.

However, were alcohol to be driven underground I think we would see a dramatic rise in deaths due to unsafe alcohol production, unscrupulous alcohol dealers, and alcoholics would find themselves not just unemployed, but facing jail sentences as well, which in our prison system does little to contribute to treatment of the problem.

So, translate to unsafe homosexual activity. If society had been mature enough to recognize the problem and face it head on, the AIDS crisis could well have been nipped in the bud by the late 1980s. Even so, it took until the mid-1990s for gay communities to get a handle on the problem.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 14 February 2006 12:17 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think also promiscuous has a slightly different connotation over there. More like "wild life" as opposed to frequent sex.

quote:
Originally posted by Screaming Lord Byron:

Still, Francis Maude has done what Ed Schreyer could not, hasn't he?


Well its all stiff upper lip until someone loses a brother.

[ 14 February 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 14 February 2006 12:27 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Screaming Lord Byron:
Still, Francis Maude has done what Ed Schreyer could not, hasn't he?

I imagine it's easier to apologize when you actually regret what you did. Schreyer, like David Emerson, seems to see himself as a victim being unfairly attacked.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Crippled_Newsie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7024

posted 14 February 2006 01:30 AM      Profile for Crippled_Newsie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
All I see is another conservative who is apparently physically unable to utter the word 'homosexual' without mentioning 'promiscuity' in the same breath.
From: It's all about the thumpa thumpa. | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 14 February 2006 01:36 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DrConway:
If society had been mature enough to recognize the problem and face it head on, the AIDS crisis could well have been nipped in the bud by the late 1980s. Even so, it took until the mid-1990s for gay communities to get a handle on the problem.

And thousands of Canadian's were infected by tainted blood in that decade from 1986 and 1990. The feds claimed there was no test that might have screened for the virus between those years. But the Krever report discovered that the Red Cross and their American contractors were accepting blood and blood products from highly questionable sources, like high risk prison inmates in the gulag system. Many Canadian's died while waiting for compensation. The French simply crucified their blood czars for criminal negligence.

[ 14 February 2006: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boarsbreath
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9831

posted 14 February 2006 08:21 PM      Profile for Boarsbreath   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I dunno. Maybe he's being deeper than you give him credit for. I've just read a novel about gay life in political London in the 80s, won a Booker, guy's name is Alan Something...damn, can't place (Googled: Alan Hollinghurst, The Line of Beauty). And I get the feeling that there was an association between Thatcherite debut-de-siecle headiness and iconoclasm and irresponsibility generally.

Avec nous le deluge, quoi. After all, that government really was a 'regime', almost defining the polity; I don't think there's ever been anything like it in Canada, except maybe Trudeau in early 70s. Maybe in particular provinces. Certainly not Ed Schruyer!

[ 14 February 2006: Message edited by: Boarsbreath ]


From: South Seas, ex Montreal | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca