Stop the BNP - Neo-Nazis threaten queer human rights

..and are they trying to force homosexuals to deny their genetic destinies ?



First of all can I just say I am curiously reluctant to comment on this post because any criticism of OutRage or questioning of homosexuality will no doubt be met with knee jerk reactions labelling this comment as 'blatent homophobia' as well as somehow automatically supportive of the BNP. From my personal perspective this is political correctness gone mad--I equate the BNP to the shit on my shoe ! (..and I fully support the following action:  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/292620.html )

Nevertheless, I feel I should point out that those who oppose homosexual are not automatically BNP supporters.

This is what OutRage fail to tell their readers:

Homosexuality is not genetic.

"The genetic theory of homosexuality has been generally discarded today. Despite the interest in possible hormone mechanisms in the origin of homosexuality, no serious scientist today suggests that a simple cause-effect relationship applies"

-Masters & Johnson
Human Sexuality: Boston 1984 p. 319
Human Sexuality: Third Edition 1988 p. 418


"With rare exceptions, homosexuality is neither genetic nor the result of some glandular disturbance. Homosexuals are made, not 'born that way'. From my 25 years' experience as a clinical psychologist, I firmly believe that homosexuality is a learned response to early experiences and that it can be unlearned."

-Dr. R. Kronemeyer
New York Tribune, May 6, 1983


"...in my 20 years of psychiatry I have never across anyone with "innate homosexuality". That notion has been a long-proclaimed gay activist political position, intended to promote the acceptance of homosexuality as a healthy, fully equal, alternative expression of human sexuality".

-Joseph Berger, MD
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry
University of Toronto
Globe & Mail February 26, 1992


"...they indicate that sexual orientation is not under the direct governance of chromosomes and
genes, and that, whereas it is not foreordained by prenatal brain hormonalization, it is influenced
thereby, and is also strongly dependent on postnatal socialization"

-Dr. John Money, John Hopkins University
"Sin, Sickness, or Status?"
American Psychologist, April, 1987 "Abstract" p. 384


"I have come to the conclusion that homosexuality is largely a matter of conditioning."

-Alfred Kinsey
Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Research
New York: Harper & Row, 1972


"We're born man, woman, and sexual beings. We learn our sexual preferences and orientations."

-William Masters & Virginia Johnson
-interview with United Press International
April 23, 1979


Indeed, there are numerous gay scientists as well as gay philosophers who openly admit there is no research proving there is a gay gene or gay brain.

From the faulty premise that homosexuals are born that way flow a number of other equally flawed assumptions. Two of these are: That society must encourage and protect individuals who think they were born gay; and that those who oppose homosexual behaviour are mentally unstable (homophobic) and are trying to force homosexuals to deny their genetic destinies.

Camille Paglia, a lesbian activist has had the courage to boldly state what most homosexuals refuse to admit: 'Homosexuality is not normal. On the contrary, it is a challenge to the norm.' "Whether homosexual behaviour is normal and genetic is a significant issue under debate in American culture today. Congress is stampeding to pass 'hate crime' and 'non-discrimination' laws providing special rights for homosexuals; school textbook writers are producing pro-homosexual materials for elementary school children; Hollywood is openly promoting homosexuality and cross-dressing; and liberal church leaders are blessing homosexual 'unions'—all under the false premise that homosexuality is a positive, normal, and genetically-based lifestyle."

So why are some gays so frightened (ashamed?) to admit that an individuals sexuality is a matter of personal choice - that is largely influenced by culture and personal experience. Why does there need to be a reason for their behaviour that is regarded beyond their control ?

If some gays think that suggesting homosexuality is learned through the values and norms of a particular society to be "homophobic" or indeed offencive to gays, and the learnt behaviour theory is then proved to be true, it would paradoxicaly be those gays who are prejudicing against homosexuals, because they appear to be saying that unless homosexuality is genetic it is wrong. Indeed, the very insistance of some gays that homosexuality must be genetic suggests they think that any other explination would make their sexual behaviour to be immoral in some way...

Why do so many gays insist homosexuality is genetic when there is absolutely no evidence of this ? Would it make any difference to their individual sexual behaviour if homosexuality is proved to be a lifestyle choice learned through the values and norms of a particular society ? Would it ? Would it really ?

We should all remember that despite what some will erronously allege there is not a shred of credible scientific evidence to demonstrate that homosexuality is genetic. If anyone tells you there is, have him/her produce the studies.


So to reiterate:

From the faulty premise that homosexuals are born that way flow a number of other equally FLAWED ASSUMTIONS. Two of these are:

1) That society must encourage and protect individuals who think they were born gay.

2) That those who oppose homosexual behaviour are mentally unstable (homophobic) and are trying to force homosexuals to deny their genetic destinies.


Also to see how some gays on Indymedia reacted to this argument when used previously (Clue: sounds like a river in Africa) please see:  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/01/283549.html

Oh look, a bigot has learnt to copy and paste!

All the quotes are taken from Fundamentalist Christian drivel:

 http://www.zeuter.com/~accc/accc/cacz-medscrip.htm

Hardly a scientific sampling of medical opinion.

But then, the bigot isn't interested in that.

He just wants to justify his hatred.

Who gives a crap if homosexuality is cultural or not!! As a professional scientist (No. Really. I am!!) I agree that it is not genetic -in fact anyone who argues that ANYTHING to do with human behaviour is genetic is generally a right wing crackpot (read any book by Steven J. Gould to expand this). Gays have a right to choose to be gay -just like vegetarians have a right to choose to be vegetarian. Or crackpots have a right to write long-winded bollocks comments on this website (unfortunately!!). I mean what the hell is the point of that?? This was a perfectly reasonable comment from a perfectly respectable gay rights campaign group.

So, anyway, back to the original (sane) comment:

This is a particularly important point I think as, given that Manchester has become the gay capital of the UK since the early nineties, with the development of the rather excellent "Gay Village", I think it would be particularly tragic if Griffin gets elected to represent the NW in Europe. Which is why all you trendy, purist, self-righteous people who log onto IMC all the time but refuse to vote, should get off your arses and vote (or at least get down to Rome for the weekend to welcome Bush!). Ok, in a general election I take the point that there is nobody worth voting for and this is a perfectly reasonable strategy, but this time VOTING IS VERY IMPORTANT!! For the very first time in an election you can actually make a difference!! VOTING WILL STOP THE BNP!! Surely I don't have to explain this?? GET OFF YOUR ARSES AND VOTE!! At least for the fact that when you are old you can explain to your even more synical grand children that YOU had the privelige to vote in the one and only election that counted for something!!

I think you'll find the quotes are from the very people I cited.

I also happen to believe religion is for fools, so no point trying to imply I am a rightwing fundamentalist.

If you had some credible science to challenge what was written then and only then would you have some kind of legitimate argument, but just ignoring the facts and calling me a bigot makes you look more like the troll...dull boy !

"We should all remember that despite what some will erronously allege there is not a shred of credible scientific evidence to demonstrate that homosexuality is genetic."

And equally, there isn't a shred of evidence to prove it isn't. There is howvever the testimony of millions of lesbian and gay people around the world that their sexual orientation is not a choice. Even if, purely for argument's sake, it were a choice, what right do governments have to interfere in the consenting relationships which harm no one?

But it isn't a choice. If it were, why would people risk social ostrisisation, prison and even death?

Most of the research you cite is decades old. Dr Money also believed that gender roles where learned behaviour and notoriously experimented with raising boys as girls - and failed... and ruined lives. The so-called "ex-gay" movement has been a spectacular failure... also leaving shattered lives in its wake.

Yes, Paglia may have said homosexuality is not "normal" - but that is quoted out of context. "Normal" simply means "not the norm" and in that she is correct. Similarly, red hair or left-handedness is not normal either - in the non-pejoritive sense that Paglia intended it.

I am constantly shocked at the arrogance and presumption of people who are not lesbian or gay to shout the odds about how and when sexual orientation is "chosen". When did you choose yours?

But even so, you're building a straw man. There is no genetic basis for Socialism or Hinduism either - does that mean people have no case for seeking to live their lives free from persecution for their political or religious beliefs?

Choice too is a human right.

Ironically many lesbian and gay people wish they did have the choice to take the easier route and follow the normatibve heterosexual model - but they don't have a choice.

Those who oppose homosexual behaviour and compare it to incest are wrong, wrong wrong I tell you ! (stamps foot and screams!!!!)

You know some of you people are so far up your own arseholes it's fucking unbelievable.

You miss the point entirely !

You, in your subjective little worlds, may not realise but there are lots and lots of straight people who are are quietly pissed off with the promotion of homosexuality within our traditional hetrosexual society.

Like most people in this country, I am a straight working class voter, but one who is concerned the BNP will get in because homosexuality is being pushed down our throats at a hundred mile an hour, whether we want it or not, and the only people who seem to be addressing the issue are BNP scum. And whether you like it or not, most people I meet, honestly do not want their children growing up with gay education in schools, etc, etc, in a society where complaining about things like inappropriate gays sex scenes on terrestial TV would most certainly be seen as 'threatening queer human rights', not by all gays I should say, but no doubt by those at involved at OutRage.

Outrages' agenda and the original article foolishly implies that those who are oppose homosexual behaviour are facist BNP supporters, when that is not at all true ! IMO Outrage are, and always have been, completely over the top. I'm not talking about this particular article only, but their campaigning style in general. I suggest they may in fact cause more homophobia (especially in the short term - i.e. between now and voting day..) and therefore perhaps subsequently adding unnessecary support for the BNP (at least where I come from they might!) by pointing out the BNP actually oppose homosexuality (I was unaware until I read this article).

Think about it: Are the likeminded people I meet all potential BNP supporters in your opinion ? Lets fucking hope not, aye ? - especially when Brett Lock uses Indymedia to diss our only hope at putting blair and bush on trial (i.e. Respect!)

Straight people, especially those with young families want some consideration and respect as well, or else they just may waste their vote in anger.

Goliath - what if homosexuality is learnt behaviour after all - we could in fact be deluding future generations (with who knows what consequences for the individual and society) for fear of political correctness...and for fear of being called a bigoted homophobe by intolerant queers who want the whole world to be just like them, but are in fact a tiny minority of the population, albiet with a very big mouth !

Do any of you remember that BNP top-dog Nick Griffin had a gay relationship when he was Cambridge University? Since rising to the top of the BNP shit-heap, he has always refused to answer any questions about this. These days he doesn't have to refuse - because people have stopped asking him the questions! So Nick - how was is for you?

And the position of Respect's ultra-conservative Muslim hardcore on the issue of homosexuality? As bad as, if not worse than the BNP. Do the BNP segregate women at meetings too? Does anyone else find it ironic that the only group in Britain opposing fascist bigotry and Islamic bigotry alike is OutRage?

Well, David, I'm sure you have everyone's appreciation for making Respect's policy on lesbian and gay rights clear.

Nick Griffin leader of the biggest load of shit party in the world is a secret closet queen, honest I know as I used to shag him up his pooper but used to lose my stroke as his false eye kept popping out.

The fact is I think he and his fucking party should be sent the biggest parcel of shite ever either before the election or just after.

The BNP and all in it are the largest load of spunk bubbles ever and get stuck up each other every night.

Nick Griffen leave all gays alone you fucking parasite, didn't you know about your fucking hero HITLER taking it up the pooper, Hess done him every weekend.

Bollocks to all fucking racist scum, one an all up against the fucking wall.

This is a serious question to Goliath relating to science

YOu said NO human behaviour is genetic - excuse my ignorance on this subject, but is there any such thing as "natural intelligence"?

I'm pretty sure I saw news of research published in the USA only last year that
strongly suggested that there IS a genetic element in being gay along with other
research that indicated that sexuality was pretty much set by bio-chemical factors
in the womb which then triggers the genetic element.
It was, i'm sure on gay.com news but cannot locate it at the moment.

Anyway a: it shouldn't matter whether it's genetic or not.
b: the vote against the BNP (and the other far-right parties -eg:English
Democratic Pty - and,perhaps the UKIP too(?) ) is what is REALLY
important here.

Personally i'm voting Green Party and though wary of them,Respect as a second choice.

All I know is that if the former cast from Michael Jacksons 'Thriller' video that call themselves 'Outrage' (see photo :  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/05/291498.html ) were to march through the town centre where I live informing the locals that the homophobic BNP are opposing them, the BNP will probably get more votes that if Outrage stayed at home. Just because that's not politically correct or unpalletable for some to accept, doesn't mean it is not true !

Besides, who excactly are lesbian and gay men are being urged to vote for in large numbers on 10 June ? Judging from you obvious hatered of Respect Brett it certainly doesn't look like you will be urging them to vote Respect, does it now...?

By the way Brett, who will YOU be voting for ? Tony (i'm not gay) bLiar, no doubt ! Oh, don't tell me, you don't want to say who you will be voting for. How very convenient !

Hey, I wonder who has been casting all the slurs against Respect on Indymedia ?

As for you 'gay lad', think about it, why would you even assume what you have when there is not a shred of evidence anywhere to support your assumtions. Don't just take my word for it, look it up. Someones been fucking with your head. I know it's not nice but that's how some selfish people are. They simply don't give a fuck about you, or your welfare, thats not their objective.

So let's see:

- Outrage! rightly identify the threat to gay people from the fascist BNP and mobilise against them.

- A number of homophobic troll-type postings appear attacking Outrage! and gay people and implying that these attacks are coming from Respect supporters.

- A bad-tempered debate ensues, presented as Outrage! vs Respect.

- Opposing the BNP drops off the agenda.

Starter for ten: who might want to start a fight like this?

David...

Firstly, saying that the gay issue makes people vote BNP is just a stupid as saying that the asylum issue or the race issue makes people vote BNP. Would you ask asylum seekers of black people to keep a low profile in case they make people vote BNP? People will vote BNP because they're bigots. Full stop.

My alleged "obvious hatred of Respect"? Where do you get such delusional notions? We urge gay people to vote against the BNP and somehow you translate this into "hatered of Respect"? Bizarre! I have said very little about Respect at all anywhere, least of all on these boards, so what you're basing your nutty assertions on is beyond me. Produce evidence of this "hatred" or shut the fuck up.

More indications of your paranoid delusions: you claim I'll "conveniently" refuse to say who I'm voting for. I've never been asked - but I'm more than happy to say (not that it's any of your busines, but hey, it's no secret) - (a) I've never voted Labour and (b) I shall be voting Green. In fact the only time I haven't voted Green is when it was necessary to strategically vote LibDem.

Your antigay rantings clearly mark you out as a homophobe. So be it. In my book that makes you as bad as the racists you apparently oppose.

..if I was paranoid I'd think OutRage was networking with New Labour people like Elton John's former manager, the Pet Shop Boys and bLiar via Mandy in some secret club, probablly called the 'Jeremy Thorpe Appreciation Society '.

But I'm not !...well maybe just a bit. ;)

Anyway, paranoia is defined as an irrational or an unwarrented fear.

Prime example from above:

Brett Lock wrote: "Well, David, I'm sure you have everyone's appreciation for making Respect's policy on lesbian and gay rights clear."

Here's the thing. Nowhere have I implied, suggested or hinted I was in anyway part of or linked to Respect. Anthough I will be voting Respect, I have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with them, let alone be responsible for making Respect's policy on lesbian and gay rights......you fruit cake !!!

So why imply I was anything to do with Respect ?

Why Brett ?

And guess who is also attacking Respect further up on the newswire based on some tabloid style rumour ? Yes the very same bloke: Brett.

Well spotted Cui bono !

Well, this is to all the sane (not David, clearly) people who have read this thread so far... you will notice that any alleged "attacks" on Respect on this thread are entirely in David's mind, as they are on whatever other thread he's referring to.

I'm still confounded by whatever twisted logic turns OutRage!'s plea to block the BNP into an "attack" on Respect. Respect weren't even mentioned on this thread until someone claiming to be a Respect suporter launched into a diatribe about how peverted and unnatural lesbians and gays are.... so go figure!

Brett, why did you say: "Well, David, I'm sure you have everyone's appreciation for making Respect's policy on lesbian and gay rights clear." when there's not even a hint that I have anything to do with Respect's policy on lesbian and gay rights ?

I'll think you'll find that's called deception...

And while I'm on the subject neither have I "launched into a diatribe about how peverted and unnatural lesbians and gays are"....

The point I'm making is that not all "Homophobes" (sic) are BNP supporter, but if you treat them as if they are you may just convince them to change their minds.

Like I said, you may not realise but there are lots and lots of straight people who are are quietly pissed off with the promotion of homosexuality within our traditional hetrosexual society. Although that doesn't mean they want to lock gays up or any other fear you have that is just as paranoid.

From talking with straight people on this subject I'd say most "Homophobes" would agree with the lesbian activist Camille Paglia, and the numerous gay scientists as well as gay philosophers who believe that from the faulty premise that homosexuals are born that way flow a number of other equally flawed assumtions. Two of these are that society must encourage and protect individuals who think they were born gay, and that those who oppose homosexual behaviour are mentally unstable (homophobic) and are trying to force homosexuals to deny their genetic destinies.

There is a legitimate argument that the foundations of OutRage are built on a faulty premise and flawed assumtions, and that in turn we could be deluding future generations for fear of political correctness. Hence my reason for commenting.

"Brett, why did you say: "Well, David, I'm sure you have everyone's appreciation for making Respect's policy on lesbian and gay rights clear." when there's not even a hint that I have anything to do with Respect's policy on lesbian and gay rights ? "

It's a little thing called "sarcasm".

My point was that by claiming to be a Respect supporter in the middle of your homophobic diatribe was not adding to your party of preference's credibility, but detracting from it.

Your chief concern appears to be not wanting to be thought of as a BNP supporter because of your extreme antigay views. Well, sleep easy. I doubt that anyone beleieves that homophobia is the preserve of right-wingers. Pity it isn't though.

If you didn't think that gays were perverted and unnatural, you wouldn't be so vociferously opposing gay rights and claiming that lesbians and gays are "deluded" and only "think" they were born gay.

Clearly we have no hope of common ground, so to prevent further time-wasting, we should terminate this discussion.

When Nick Griffin said something like 'if gay rights activist continue to push their agenda further it could evoke an almighty backlash' he could be right. That's a scarey thought considering it could earn him more support. (This I suggest the BNP could do by dumbing down it's real intentions making them more acceptable to bog standard "homophobes" who would normally tolerate homosexuality within the community to some degree.)

Not only that but if OutRage evokes this reaction in the UK, how do they see themselves winning their war in Muslim countries where homosexuality is regarded as a taboo subject ? (Because that is their stated objective...)

And should we be content with the fact that OutRage will evidently steer lesbians and gays away from voting Respect on June 10 because Brett Lock repeatedly implies that Respect have "homophobic" policies, especially when his accusations are based on heresay, rumours and make belief ?

I don't know about you but I'm still puzzled by the notion that because I'm a so called "homophobe" and I will vote Respect, that somehow means Respect are all homophobes ? Not forgetting of course the fuzzy logic that suggests all so called "homophobes" share the same predjudices as Nick Griffin and want to lock queers away.

Surely it is a very small mind that thinks like that ?

Speaking of which, in your mind does the *lesbian* activist Camille Paglia, and the numerous *gay scientists* as well as *gay philosophers* who I totally agree with have "homophobic" and "extreme antigay views" as well.............................?

 http://home.wanadoo.nl/ipce/library_two/files/paglia_guide.htm

"...I am a sixties social activist. Where there is social injustice I think we have to take strong action to remedy it. But politics should not become a god to us. To me, art transcends all politics. I don't believe in God, I'm an atheist but matters of spirit and of the mind transcend all political affiliations. I would like a balance between art and politics. Everyone who knows anything about me knows that the minute there is a problem, I am out there and I am in people's faces, and I have kicked and punched people, and I was fired from a college my first job for getting in a fist fight.

What I'm saying does not mean that political action is invalidated. But the point is that we cannot allow politics to take over, to become obsessive, and that's what I think has happened. There are the fanatical excesses of ACT UP, for example: that storming into the cathedral in Philadelphia when the archbishop was celebrating a mass for the AIDS dead. They threw condoms at his chest., they bounced off the chest of the archbishop on the altar, they threw condoms in the aisle. At St. Patrick's cathedral in New York, ACT UP threw the host on the ground. I would rather have the far right in charge of our culture to have such fanatics, people so irreverent of sacred spaces, and of the beauty of a cathedral. I think it is appalling, and symptomatic of the kind of errors that were made by gay activists that have led to the backlash.

As a worldwide movement, both feminism and gay activism are necessary, but I'm concerned that the worldwide movement not make the errors that were made in the U.S. You don't want a situation where you antagonize the people. A truly progressive politics should be about speaking to the mass of the people. It should not be a middle-class, elitist posturing with its paternalistic attitude toward the working class, saying, oh, you're so benighted, so ignorant. We are the educated one, and your homophobia comes out of the deepest, darkest ignorance. I hate that. That has been the tactic of gay activists in America, and it has backfired. It is condescending, it is outrageous, and I hope that the worldwide gay movement does not make that mistake.

I've constantly been saying that if you do not watch what you are doing, if you commit acts that are so excessive that they alienate the people, then all you're doing is creating a backlash for yourself. Thus this far-right victory, which I have been predicting for years, and it's gay men who will pay the price for this on the streets...."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also see:  http://www.worthyopinions.com/commentary/born-gay.html

"..Eric M. Pollard, a founder of ACT UP/D.C., says that ACT UP's philosophy was built upon the writings of Hitler in Mein Kampf. Pollard admitted this in an unusually candid article in the Washington Blade on January 31, 1991.

According to Pollard, "I have helped to create a truly fascist organization." Pollard says "We conspired to bring into existence an activist group that … could effectively exploit the media for its own ends, and that would work covertly and break the law with impunity… Under the influence of powerful, illicit drugs [LSD], it really seemed like a good idea." [2]

Pollard admits that ACT UP/DC believed it should use deliberately subversive tactics, "… drawn largely from the voluminous Mein Kampf, which some of us studied as a working model. As ACT UP/DC grew, we struck intently and surgically into whatever institutions we believed to stand in our way."...."

 http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a4a452479a6.htm

'Jerusalem gay parade triggers threats and controversy'

"..Dozens of city residents who oppose the parade phoned Netanel and cursed him. Earlier today, anonymous callers told his mother that they were planning to "blow up" the parade. Netanel filed a complaint with the police

"These mental patients will not deter me or the gay community in our struggle for a tolerant, open and pluralistic Jerusalem. The attempt to personally harm me by publishing my phone numbers is a cowardly act", Netanel told Maariv Online tonight.

Members of the gay community center in Jerusalem, which organizes the parade, sent Netanel a letter, expressing their shock at the poster. "The use of your picture and your phone numbers is despicable", it read......."


 http://www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article&articleID=8121

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2004/02/285928.html

"Our War Too - Gay Heroes, and Gay Necessities"

Faggots in Arms, 24.02.2004 19:14

A Gay Praise of the War Against Terror


....For of all wars, this is surely one in which gay America can take a proud and central part. The men who have launched a war on this country see the freedom that gay people have here as one of the central reasons for their hatred. In their twisted perversion of Islam, these monsters believe that gay men and women deserve to be tortured and executed in hideous fashion. They murder and muzzle women; they despise and murder Jews; they demonize gays. We have rightly seen how Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson have destroyed themselves by their hatred in this moment - and we can take solace that America has repudiated their poison. But let us also remember that the men who committed this atrocity make Falwell and Robertson look mild in comparison. They are the Religious Ultra-Right, and they have already murdered us. Given the chance, they would wipe gay people from the face of the earth. To respond to that threat by cautioning peace or surrender or equivocation is to appease men who would destroy every last vestige of gay America if they could. Gay Americans should not merely support this war as a matter of patriotism and pride; they should support it because the enemy sees us as one of their first targets for destruction. These maniacs despise our freedom; they loathe our diversity; they have contempt for our culture. There is no gray here. There is simply a choice: to cower and run in fear of these monsters or to stand up with every other segment of this country - of every race and creed and gender and sexual orientation - and defeat these messengers of hate in the hope of a brighter, integrated day.


Andrew Sullivan

September 21, 2001, PlanetOut.

Homepage:  http://andrewsullivan.com/thewar.php?artnum=20010921

Ref; www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm?*****fuseaction******=article&articleID=8121

fuseaction ?

fuse - suggests the action (or 'Backlash') was purposely started.

action - "for every action there is a reaction" - Newton’s Third Law.

Forgetting the human chess game in Jerusalem for a moment, should we be asking ourselves if Brett Lock and the BNP opposite sides of the same coin ? Or is the bigger question whether or not Brett Lock and those at OutRage are suffering from what I think is called "conscious denial" ?

'No More Lies'says:
"Forgetting the human chess game in Jerusalem for a moment, should we be asking ourselves if Brett Lock and the BNP opposite sides of the same coin ? Or is the bigger question whether or not Brett Lock and those at OutRage are suffering from what I think is called "conscious denial" ?"


And you come to these bizarre conclusions how?

I post a story headlined "Stop the BNP - Neo-Nazis threaten queer human rights" and for some reason - which I trust you'll explain - you decide the BNP and I are opposite sides of the same coin? Why?

If we remember back to the fanatical excesses of OutRage, such as the protest in 1994 outside a gathering of Muslims in London where members of OutRage carried antagonistic placards saying 'Islam Nazis burn and behead queers', or the famous storming the pulpit at Canterbury Cathedral on an Easter Sunday, where Peter Tatchell took over the microphone from Archbishop George Carey, it becomes quite clear from the glaring similarities that OutRage in the UK, just like Act Up in the US, use the very same subversive Mein Kampf style philosphy and tactics to achieve their objectives.

Personaly, even as an atheist myself, I can't understand why anyone, gay or straight, would support such fanatics, people so irreverent of other peoples religions, sacred spaces, and of the beauty of a cathedral. I think it is appalling ! You don't want a situation where you antagonize the people, so in that sense "OutRage" is an oxymoron when used as a title of a gay rights campaign strategy. A truly progressive politics should be about forming coalitions, speaking to the mass of the people.

Not only that but "OutRage" use these subversive Nazi style tactics to achieve what many people (both gay and straight) legitimately believe are seriously flawed objectives. Objectives that have absolutely no tolerance or respect for other peoples attitudes, and which are therefore, quite logically, extremely likely to cause a backlash - as was pointed out by both the quoted prediction (provided above) from the well known lesbian activist Camille Paglia, and then further confirmed as entirely evident in the news article (above) telling us of the recent backlash against the gay parade in Jerusalem !

Subsequently, with this knowledge starring you in the face, year in year out, why any gay activists would even think of courting peoples prejudices, and risking such a backlash, at a time when the BNP are looking for homophobic votes is obviously quite worrying - especially when you (Brett Lock) are also paradoxicaly advocating (and even participating in!) giving the BNP a platform to promote their views here on Indymedia (with this very article), and even on the BBC...

(see  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/292726.html )

..Not to mention sharing some obvious Islamophobic views yourselves - whilst I might add, using your self appointed platform to steer others who read your opinions away from voting for those who are truely against the war, the illegal occupation, the sending of further troops to Iraq, the holding to account of the war criminals who threaten our civil liberties, and who also want and end to the corporate fat cats who exploite the vunerable and who pollute our environment with total disregard...all by repeatedly and falsely implying the Respect Coalition have homophobic policies...!

In that respect Brett, I trust you will now clearly see how you and your patently fascist, in your face, subversive, Nazi style tactics are seen as part of the bigger problem. Consequently, you and the BNP could indeed be said to be opposite sides of the same coin. A coin that only buys votes for a far right victory, which ever way you may look at the subject of homosexuality.

Now that this perhaps unpaletable reality has been pointed out to you people at OutRage, and in public for all to see, you can no longer plead ignorance* should such a predictable backlash occur as a result of OutRage continuing to push their objectives further down peoples throats, in the manner you notoriously do, both here in the UK where we have the BNP to worry about, and also in the Arab/Muslim world where OutRage has recently delared it intends to take its fight.

(*Not that I personally think that Brett Lock, Peter Tatchell and the rest of OutRage are ignorant of course..!!)

Precisely why OutRage would choose to take their fight, at this present time, to outrage the Arab/Muslim world into submission, to a place where it is widely known that people are particularly vulnerable to sexual humiliation, and where homosexual activity, or any indication of homosexual leanings, as with all other expressions of sexuality, is never given any publicity... (except of course in the infamous pictures of torture, abuse and the sickening stories of both female and male rape continue to be brandished throughout the worlds media) ..is beyond any kind of sane logical explination, because surely if you alienate the people, which you at "OutRage" inevitably will, all you're doing is creating a backlash for yourself and other gays throughout the world (which will be a victory for the far-right!), and, dare I say, even earn yourselves accusations that you are part of the Mein Kampf style philosphy and tactics used by the Neo-Cons in their psycops !


Regards,

1. OutRage!'s protest methods are based on those of Gandhi. Perhaps it would surprise you to learn that during his lifetime, the majority of Indians _didn't_ support him, and regarded him as a troublemaker.

2. Governments in Islamic countries oppress, even kill queers. Queers do not have any agenda to oppress and murder muslims. I think it's pretty clear who the oppressors in this specific situation are. If you're happy to uncritically side with the oppressors, don't be surprised when some pissed-off queers show up with placards.

3. Coalition building comes from rationalism. Schism is the result of dogma. OutRage! has formed many coalitions with other organisations sharing our goals, which are: To fight against homophobia and for sexual equality and liberation.

4. To claim that the BNP and OutRage! share in any way the same goals is at best totally naive, at worst malicious defamation. I question your motives. I do not believe your agenda is one of freedom for all.

*** "If we remember back to the fanatical excesses of OutRage, such as the protest in 1994 outside a gathering of Muslims in London where members of OutRage carried antagonistic placards saying 'Islam Nazis burn and behead queers'" ***

Antagonistic? Perhaps. True? Definitely! Or perhaps you might call Amnesty International a "Fascist Islamophobic" organisation too because they catalogue the gross human rights abuses in countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan. 1994 was ten years ago, yet the imprisonment, torture and execution of homosexuals in many Islamic countries continues. Why do you seek to protect torturers and murderers? Groups like the Muslim Council of Britain actively campaign against civil rights for lesbian and gay people - should they be beyond criticism?

*** "or the famous storming the pulpit at Canterbury Cathedral on an Easter Sunday, where Peter Tatchell took over the microphone from Archbishop George Carey" ***

The Church of England consistantly refused to enter into peaceful dialogue with the gay community while using its unelected platoon of Bishops in the undemocratic House of Lords to constantly attack gay rights legislation, while their pulputs were used to drum up homophobia every Sunday. With all their institutional power brought to bear against a defenseless community, what do you think we should have done? Respect their "sacred" days while they waged war against gays and destroyed lives?

*** "it becomes quite clear from the glaring similarities that OutRage in the UK, just like Act Up in the US, use the very same subversive Mein Kampf style philosphy and tactics to achieve their objectives." ***

That is about as logical as saying that campaigning for subsidised school lunches implies support for Stalin's Gulags. Besides, have you ever considered that "no platform" is also an appropriation of Nazi-style tactics - the idea that some ideas are better silenced than countered with better ideas. It is often an effective strategy but ironically one pioneered by the brownshirts, but you don't see me calling you a Nazi. Another Nazi tactic you seem to have borrowed is the same one George Dubyah uses: labelling anyone with reservations about party othodoxy as an enemy: "if you're not 100% behind us, then you're against us!". Where is your committment to free-speech and robust debate - or must everyone just unquestioningly fall in line?

I have no idea if Act-Up in the US borrowed tactical ideas from the Nazis, but to imply that gay groups ARE Nazis is a fucking insult when the Nazis pinned pink triangles on our chests and sent tens of thousands of queers to their deaths in the concentration camps.

*** "Not to mention sharing some obvious Islamophobic views yourselves" ***

I challenge you to list them. But I caution you, protesting against the human rights abuses by male heterosexual Muslims against women and gay Muslims is NOT Islamophobic. Protesting agianst Muslim groups who support discriminatory legislation against lesbians and gays is NOT Islamophobic.

Besides, your argument is as ridiculous as saying the Muslim Council of Britain supports the BNP because they have the same homophobic views.

*** "all by repeatedly and falsely implying the Respect Coalition have homophobic policies...! " ***

Do you dispute that their are groups in the Respect Coalition who have homophobic views?

*** "Precisely why OutRage would choose to take their fight, at this present time, to outrage the Arab/Muslim world into submission, to a place where it is widely known that people are particularly vulnerable to sexual humiliation, and where homosexual activity, or any indication of homosexual leanings, as with all other expressions of sexuality, is never given any publicity... " ***

At the present time? By your own admission, we have been confronting Muslim homophobia and human rights abuses since 1994.

Perhaps you missed our posting on this very topic at:
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/292673.html

*** "is beyond any kind of sane logical explination, because surely if you alienate the people, which you at "OutRage" inevitably will, all you're doing is creating a backlash for yourself and other gays throughout the world (which will be a victory for the far-right!)" ***

That argument is as absurd and ridiculous as saying that standing up against racism and demonisation of asylum seekers will provoke a backlash and create support for the BNP. We're not going to sit back and be good, quiet little queers and ignore the abuse and persecution just because you think it is politically inconvenient.

Has it ever occurred to you that there is some tragic irony in standing up for the rights of asylum seekers in the UK without being willing to address the issues that made them flee their home countries to seek asylum here in the first place?

Just one such example of head-in-the-sand hypocrisy: When OutRage! recently campaigned on behalf of asylum seekers from Jamaica, it was fine until we criticised the reasons they were forced to flee to the UK, THEN we were accused of "racism" and "cultural imperialism". We were one of the first groups to criticise Blunkett's stupid asylum policy, but we also have the courage to go the whole hog and open the debate on why people are forced into exile in the first place!

If I'm not 100% behind you, what would you say I am...? If gay activists, politicians, scientists and philosophers are not behind you, what are they ?

Geddit ? That is what you at OutRage are saying !

Whether or not you do or do not have moral justification for using subversive tacticts, to achieve your objectives, does not retract from the fact that you use Nazi tactics to achieve your objectives .

You patently use the same intolerant tactics as Act Up, and those tactics are based on Nazi ideology. I'm not doubting whether Act Up have achieved great many things for the gay communite in the US using such effective tactics, but effective or not, those tactics are still based on Nazi ideology !

Rightly or wrongly, those tactics have absolutely no tolerance or respect for other peoples attitudes. When you, George Bush, Hitler, or anyone else, use those tactics you are all still saying: "if you're not 100% behind us, then you're against us!" It is no different to Nick Griffin saying homosexuals should be thrown in jail, and anyone who isn't 100% behind his idea are his enemy....

So, again, rightly or wrongly, when you use those tactics to address a gathering of Muslims what you are in effect saying, either you're 100% behind us, or you're against us ! Which is no different to saying except homosexuality into your culture or each one of you are my enemy.

Obviously, saying that to people whose Islamic cultural origings regects homosexuality is naturaly going to be seen as a threat to the beliefs and way of life of those particular people - and subsequntly (rightly or wrongly) could be called Islamophobic simply because it opposes what they see as their Islamic way of life, with no room for discussion, and would therefore be met with hostility - i.e. a backlash.

It is surely plain for anyone to see that (rightly or wrongly) this deliberate strategy which offers no consideration or respect of other peoples beliefs, attitues and opinions, is a fascist do it or else style bullying. Or motivation by fear if you like. The same goes for when you, or anyone else, uses that tactic anywhere, be it in a place of worship or when addressing any political view point, etc.

For you to use that tactic now, when the BNP are looking for homophobic votes, and when Muslims have been subjected to gross sexual humiliation in the world media, against what you (righly or wrongly) see as confronting Muslim homophobia, is, by your own admission: 'Antagonistic' ! True ? Definitely...!

In that sense you must surely be completely aware that you fully intend to antagonise people which will inevitably cause a backlash - because, sure enough: "for every action there is a reaction". What I'm saying is, to creat a backlash now, when the BNP are looking for homophobic votes, and when Muslims have been subjected to gross sexual humiliation, will not win hearts and minds, either in the short term or the foreseeable future - both here in the UK, and in the Arab/Muslim world.

David, listen to yourself... the same arguments you give use to excuse or justify homophobia could be used to justify racism. Do you have "tolerance or respect" for other people's "attitudes" when those attitudes are racist? Don't the BNP say that their "culture" and "way of life" are "under threat" from immigration by other races? Is there "room for discussion" on "tolerating" racism and are you therefore suprised when racists treat you with "hostility"? Do you give "consideration or respect" to the BNP's racist "beliefs, attitues and opinions"?

When you make excuses for and tolerate one form of discrimination you end up excusing ALL forms of descrimination.

But let's take a look at culture. When you say something is part of "Islamic Culture" don't you really mean that it is part of HETEROSEXUAL MALE Islamic Culture? Or do you imagine that Muslim women sat down as equals with the men and decided through mutual consent and negotiation that they would be oppressed and accept second-class status? Is it part of gay Islamic Culture to submit to persecution? So, when you defend a culture, what you really end up doing is defending the *dominant* expression of that culture at the expense of the marginalised and oppressed within that same culture. What about *their* culture? Surely it is our duty to side with them over their oppressors, not with those within that culture who seek to dominate and oppress?

Besides, if we excuse homophobia on the basis of culture, the we may as well excuse racism too. Oh dear, people can't help being racist because it's "part of their culture". Bollocks to that. Cultures can and must be pressured to change.

On the issue of so-called "nazi tactics", I feel you are being a bit silly. Tactics are not the same as ideology. Whenever you hold a house meeting or set up a local "cell" of your group, you are using a nazi-tactic. That's how they initially mobilised - very effectively. More ominously, when you seek to give a speaker with whom you disagree "no platform" or picket and heckle them if the event goes ahead, that too is a "nazi tactic". When postal workers refuse to deliver political mailings with which they disapprove, that is a "nazi tactic" because it seeks to intervene to prevent freedom of speech, as does "no platform". So you see, the term is essentially meaningless and nothing more than a cheap and shallow attempt to taint a group by implying association with an unsavoury group - which - suprise, suprise - is *also* a tactic used to great effect by the Nazis.

Are you afraid you'll cause a racist "backlash" by opposing racism? I hope not.

And finally, you say "the BNP are looking for homophobic votes". Yes, they're looking for racist, sexist, nationalist and reactionary votes along with the homophobic ones. But are they the only ones? The Respect-aligned PJP put out a leaflet which read:

"Another Lib Dem policy not in favour of the British Muslim community is the teaching of gay sex education to your children at a very young age. The Lib Dems are also in favour of equal rights for gays and lesbians. Do you want this?"

So it seems that in the scramble for votes, EVERYONE wants the homophobic vote - presumably because there is no shortage of homophobes... the fact of which we are painfully aware.

I'm glad you finaly have to admit it is your intention to antagonize people by showing a zero telerance for anyone elses views - even if it was camouflaged in a rather unnecessary series of obsurde rationalisations.

For example, you can't comparing racism to homophobia on some kind of moral equivalance, when no such thing exists in reality.

As you will know, a person is born a particular race, but there is no credible research that suggest that people are born gay - even after gay scientist spent years looking for some evidence. They could not find it because there is no gay brain, homosexuality is not genetic. The truth is that a great many people legitimately believe that all sexuality is a matter of individual attitude, subsequently there is a considered belief that homosexuals are made through subtle forms of social conditioning. Hence, rasist prejudices are quite different to so called homophobic predjudices, because there is a legitimate debate to be had on whether or not all homophobic prejudices are unfounded, unlike that of rasist prejudices.

Thus, arguments from conserned parents who are quite naturaly cautious about such things as their children recieving gay education in schools are therefore a legitimate and serious argument to be had, and IMHO well over due - as gay education could in itself be said to be a form of social conditioning. So yes there is an legitimate excuse for some forms of so-called homophobia. Hence your policy of zero tolerance for all those who oppose homosexuality is fundamentaly flawed, and as we have seen, is likely to only serve to inflame emotions on both sides of the argument.

Besides, if we reverse the situation and ask; What if, say, British Muslims, in a reaction to event in the middle east, use your subversive methods to get a simular message accross to their opponents. How would people react to Muslims storming a sacred place, on a sacred day, shouting out some intolerant rhetoric, or confronting Jews with placards that read something like 'fascist Jews are the infadel', with presicely the same zero tellerance attitude you have ?......What would happen ? I honestly dread to think !

Of course it would never happen because British Muslims would have to be off their rockers to identify with your subversive methods. For Muslims to copy OutRage in any way would most certainly cause an almighty backlash for them, and their Muslim brothers and sisters, both here in the UK and elsewhere in the world. So yes, using the senario above I would be afraid causing a racist "backlash" by opposing racism.

Why do you expect a different reaction when you antagonize your opponents ?

Logically you can not !

You wrote: "Whenever you hold a house meeting or set up a local "cell" of your group, you are using a nazi-tactic..."

I don't doubt what you are saying could be true, I just haven't a clue what you are talking about in all honesty. FYI, I am not, nor have I ever been, active in local politics, or affiliated to any political group etc. I am merely anj individual social thinker who is housebound by a disability, and who spend most of my time reading through articles on places like Indymedia, and more recently WRH. Like most people reading articles here, I use the internet to educate myself so to expand on the information and knowledge I have required. You appear to be attempting some form of subversion against me, by implying something entirely fabricated about myself, to obviously try and weaken my argument, instead of consentrating on the issues raised and engaging in rational debate. Tut, tut !

I am also completely lost when you use the phrase 'Respect-aligned PJP', perhaps you can briefly explain what this vauge term actually means ?

You two will never agree. And anyone bothering to read all this must've made up their mind too by now... so neither of you are really changing any other minds either.

I suggest this thread is becoming pointless. Perhaps one of you needs to let the other have the last word and leave it at that!

I think David has argued his case very well. He is raising a potentialy serious issue that definately needs addressing. My partner and I would feel extremely let down if Brett or others at OutRage! ignored this issue.

See:  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/292960.html

And remember, I am a atheist. I think the bible is the devils' paradox, and that 'all' religious ideology is formed from the same human sub-conscious conclusions, and that, in turn, each religion is based around a particular culture/environment, or more accurately, based on the world we *previously* lived in...

So, logicaly, no one can really say that I am a right-wing Christian now can they ! Especially as I have always voted labour up until 97, been dispondent ever since, but will be voting Respect on June 10th, not because of any policy on gender..., but because of the bloody 100 year quagmire we are all about to get trapped in unless we put Bush and Blair on trial for war crimes.

The reason why I have a knowledge of homosexuality is because of a previous gay experience I once had, not a sexual experience you inderstand, just that my former psychology tutor was a lesbian, and she was an experience I'll never forget ! She was completely and utterly adamat homosexuality was innate. She went ballistic, and I mean BALLISTIC, if anyone so much as challenged that belief. Anyway, it got me thinking...

How can the BNP fight against homosexually when John Tydall who foundered both National front and British National Party when he was a member of the Nazi pary who was started by a Homosexual Hitler