Jan Moir - Homophobic bitch of the highest magnitude

I don't think she does herself any favours trying to justify her opinions in today's Daily Fail... perhaps it would be better is she just shut up completely

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1222246/The-truth-views-tragic-death-Stephen-Gately.html

Not even a nod at an apology. Just self-serving damage-limitiation from Moir, and another attempt by the Heil to capitalise on a homophobic story that stirred up a shit storm to sell yet more papers. Very, very depressing.

Why do you not except that as an apology? She addresses every contentious issue. She does however not stand down but instead defends her position. whether you agree with her or not, it's not as bleak as you make out IMO.

I think the main reason why the original column has provoked such an outcry is because she doesn't come right out as a homophobe, but insinuates and hints, which simply screams hypocrisy. I find it very hard to believe that if she had wanted to write a column about 'louche' celebrity lifestyles, she could have done so quite easily in a completely different way from the way the column is written. She would probably still have caused offence so close to his death, but she could have made it clear there and then that she wasn't attributing his death to his being gay. No matter what she says, this is how it comes across. 22,000 complaints is clear enough testimony how people understood it, I think.

"Absolutely none of this had anything to do with his sexuality. If he had been a heterosexual member of a boy band, I would have written exactly the same article"

"Another real sadness about Gately's death is that it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships."

Well at least she's cleared that up.

Why do you not except that as an apology? She addresses every contentious issue. She does however not stand down but instead defends her position. whether you agree with her or not, it's not as bleak as you make out IMO.

First off I think the situation is bleak because this excuse for an apology is just going to sell more Daily Mails.

Secondly, this is not an apology. The original article was blatantly homophobic. This follow-up is just her arguing that she is NOT. That the original article was tragically misunderstood.

The point of my article was to suggest that, in my honest opinion, Stephen Gately's death raised many unanswered questions. What had really gone on? After all, Stephen was a role model for the young and if drugs were somehow involved in his death, as news reports suggested, should that not be a matter of public interest?

It was in the public interest see? And drugs were invovled! DRUGS! well, cannabis.

That's just ONE hole I haven't got the time to pick through the whole thing. But it's outrageous and depressing. In some ways worse than the original article.

[QUOTE=Superprecise;1022835]Why do you not except that as an apology? She addresses every contentious issueQUOTE]

My main problem with it is that she defends herself by saying her column was 'misinterpreted', that the backlash was an orchestrated campaign - welcome, Daily Mail, to the interweb; and just because its an orchestrated campaign doesn't mean that those people who sign up to it are any less angry - and she rounds it off by saying are we becoming a society where no one can dare question the circumstances or behaviour of a person.

Well, yes, if it's based on fact. Her original premise was that there had been some sleazy aspect to Gately's death - but that was just innuendo. No evidence of a hedonistic lifestyle except a spliff or two and a random shag. And nothing in the coroner's report to suggest any suspicious circumstance. Which kind of invalidates the whole of the original piece...

Why do you not except that as an apology?

Because it's the equivalent of saying "I'm sorry if....", "I'm sorry that....", "I'm sorry but....." - instead of just saying "I'm sorry". Qualifying the apology isn't an apology.

Good point.

Personally I'd never ever ever have read the article if it wasn't on the forum. I'm 100% certain that every issue of the Mail is replete with articles that I would find as obnoxious as this one. As a paper their entire view of the world seems to conflict with mine and frankly I'm bored of hearing about it.

Homophobic *bitch*. Had the article been written by a man what misandrist term would you have employed to replace 'bitch'?

"cock eater"? It maintains the irony in a nice way.

Must be very confusing for the Mail. They routinely publish shit like this and get away with it, so they must be wondering how to apologise for this article and yet go on with their hatred of working mothers, immigrants, left-wing politicians etc. I guess this particular article reached a tipping point because of Gately's fans, and because it reached the right areas of the web, twitter etc. It was no more deserving of complaint than large swathes of the Daily Mail. But at least it does bring to wider public attention the bile and innuendo that exists within this excuse for a newspaper.

"cock eater"? It maintains the irony in a nice way.

that would be, implicitly, homophobic not misandrist so yes it would be equally as impressive :)

Must be very confusing for the Mail. They routinely publish shit like this and get away with it

Precisely. Whether they like it or not - and the Mail doesn't - it's not necessarily newspapers that set the news agenda these. If they had stuck to it's anti immigrant rants no one would have said much. But it chose the wrong target: a young, tech-savvy, loyal fanbase. And it got well and truly fucked over

Precisely. Whether they like it or not - and the Mail doesn't - it's not necessarily newspapers that set the news agenda these. If they had stuck to it's anti immigrant rants no one would have said much. But it chose the wrong target: a young, tech-savvy, loyal fanbase. And it got well and truly fucked over

I wish their anti-immigration stuff would get picked up as widely.

Was it just that Gately's fans are more tech savvy that this exploded? I think pinpointing exactly what made this snowball is important. Maybe then we can start highlighting all the other evil the Heil propogates.

that would be, implicitly, homophobic not misandrist so yes it would be equally as impressive :)

True. It's not a misandrist term. I fail... Damn it. The irony of hating the haters remains though. Corny would like it.

You cock.

I take it back! I think there is something inherently man-hating in the term "cock eater" (in addition to being clearly homophobic. Unless you're talking about poultry). It seems to have an inherent negativity in relation to the masculine appendage. It also goes further and taints anyone who comes in (oral) contact with one.

Maybe then we can start highlighting all the other evil the Heil propogates.
As someone posted earlier, see http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/. A brave attempt to highlight Mail bigotry.

True. It's not a misandrist term. I fail... Damn it. The irony of hating the haters remains though. Corny would like it.

You cock.

you pussy
you clit
you labia
you vulva
you fanny hill
you vagina dentata
you womb
you fallopian
you Oh Bodyform, Bodyform for you
you weather girl
you pro-biotic yoghurt
you Virginia Slim
you Sheila's Wheels
you Orange Prize winner
you Pankhurst
you Rosa Luxembourg
you full Brazilian

I use the term pussy in relation to cats. And I take being called a Rosa Luxemburg as a compliment.

I use the term pussy in relation to cats. And I take being called a Rosa Luxemburg as a compliment.

well, duh.

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/05/28/101-being-offended/

You've lost me, Will.

Prick face.

"you Sheila's Wheels."

That made me sneeze banana through my nose.

Thanks.

You've lost me, Will.

Prick face.

see you this weekend i hope; if you're feeling better.
man-boob head.