If only it were a joke.
The Life And Times Of Vivienne Vyle Page 6
Quote: Frankie Rage @ October 12, 2007, 5:44 PMThe firemen need to be able to stand and watch gay orgies too without being fined..
..and if a public decency crime has been committed, the police need to be able to make arrests without being labelled homophobic!
Why on earth is cottaging illegal? It's not a public indecency, as it's not public. You're allowed to defecate in the toilets for goodness sake.
I'd never thought of it quite like that before.
You are some kind of genius.
Or a passionate gay rights campaigner.....actually, no, the answer is simply that I have too much time on my hands.
Down 500,000 on the ratings to 1.3M. Peter S only got 1 million.
Quote: Cinnamon @ October 12, 2007, 11:25 PMWhy on earth is cottaging illegal? It's not a public indecency, as it's not public. You're allowed to defecate in the toilets for goodness sake.
Are you sure you've thought that through?
Anyway, the episode I'm referring to was an orgy (multiple people having sexual intercourse in the same place) and in a public place outside. And before I hear the cry of "homophobia!" it's not a question of whether they were homosexuals, lesbians or heterosexuals. It's against the law to have sex in a public space. This was not in a public toilet and by the way, I think it is or ought to be illegal to have sex in a public toilet, as it's certainly not designed for that. What kind of human being wants to have sex in a public toilet anyway? How awful! And what if a family with children wants to use the toilet? Maybe that's why it's against the law? Doh... think about it! If you want to change the law to make sex in public legal, go and see your MP and ask him to propose a change in the law in the House of Commons.
The rules are, if people want to have sex it should be in private, in the home or in a hotel or some private place, not in a public place and that applies to all genders and sexes. It's against the law for a reason. We are supposed to be civilised, not animals just 'having it off' in the street, park bushes, public toilets, etc.
The real shame of this is that the people involved got off and the firemen got fined and disciplined just for looking and because a complaint was made against them by those engaged in the orgy. Out-bloody-rageous!!! And another thing, IMO it looks like a case of positive discrimination as I believe if they had been heterosexuals they would have been arrested by police and charged with public indecency when they made their complaint about the firemen.
I am sick and tired of so-called minority groups being given preferential treatment in this way. They should be treated the same as everybody else, I thought that's what they wanted? Positive Discrimination is just as wrong as Discrimination IMO.
And anybody who does call me homophobic will get the full throttle of my wrath as some of my best mates are White English Gay Metropolitan Police Officers!!!
Sorry for the rant Cinnamon but IMO your view is just plain wrong... 
Quote: zooo @ October 12, 2007, 11:27 PMI'd never thought of it quite like that before.
You are some kind of 'genius'.
You've spelt 'woolly thinker' wrong again... 
Don't unload this rant upon me. I fully agree that sex in public is wrong, whatever the gender or orientation, I just vaguely assumed that you were referring to cottaging as I hadn't heard of this one incident. When it comes to your comment that you don't know why they'd want to do that, I don't really either, and I'm sure that they're not overjoyed by the prospect. The thing is that because homosexuals are still viewed with some disdain or disgust over the country, they often would find it far safer to meet in a toilet than in a home. We don't need to 'crack down' on things like this, we need to continue encouraging understanding so that they don't have to 'operate underground', to coin a cliche.
Obviously your stated incident is an absurd one, and I have full sympathy with the authorities involved. It was wrong and taking the firemen to the courts was frankly outrageous. Something better to be angered by, however, is the fact that one third of all teen suicides are bullied or worried homosexuals, which, in my opinion, suggests that we're not quite the nation of tolerance that we perceive ourselves to be.
I'll overlook the 'wooly thinking' label. Considering the abuse that's confronted you when you've aired your own views I'd have thought that you'd have a modicum of restraint.
God I sound up my own arse (not in public, thankfully). You can feel free to disregard the above but it may have touched a nerve.
More to the point I apologise if I have touched your nerve. A lot of my rant wasn't directed towards you at all. I retract the 'woolly thinking' label, it was just a retort, and not meant seriously...
But I am talking about sex in public. The fact that homesexuals may have difficulties in this society and that some teenage homosexuals commit suicide is really not relevant IMO. We can't condone sex in public toilets for that reason. It's the wrong answer to their problems.
When it comes to sex, it's not compulsory like eating food or breathing. If they can't find a more appropriate place then the order of the day should be restraint. In the past my girlfriends and I had nowhere to go when we were living at home and didn't have our own places, and our families weren't tolerant to teenagers having sex at home and so there wasn't any sex, just kissing and discreet fumblings and not too much of that in public.
It NEVER occurred to us to go and 'do it' in a public toilet. Get real, mate! It's plain wrong, there's no excuse.
Homosexual teenagers committing suicide is a completely different issue. I am tolerant to homosexuals (as long as they are law abiding citizens) but cannot condone sexual activities in public for whatever reason.
If other people are intolerant towards homosexuals BECAUSE they are homosexuals, then that is just plain wrong too but a completely different topic.
If you see it differently then we can agree... to disagree!
Here's an example of my thinking:
If I saw a heterosexual couple having sex in the park, I wouldn't necessarily report them if they were being discreet. Nor would I report an homosexual or lesbian couple. BUT if they were being indiscreet and there were children playing nearby, then I would report any of them, irrespective of gender/sexuality.
I think that's sensible, but maybe I am the one that would end up in court if they were Gay and I'd be villified as a homophobic stalker?
I'd like to think not, but...
It's a paradox that in the desire to be treated more like a human, we can actually act more like animals, by having sex in a public place and thinking it reasonable or a violation of 'rights.'
The idea that cottaging and dogging is permissible in a public toilet? Can't imagine too many parents endorsing that. When I want to express my human rights, grabbing the car and driving to the local lav isn't my first instinct.
Rights are two-edged, they give but they also demand. They are a responsibility rather than a political / social battering ram to enforce a behaviour / attitude on society.
I agree with Frankie and Aaron in that it seems minorities no longer seem satisfied with EQUALITY, they want preferential treatment to make amends for past and present injustice. Which is a frankly ludicrous argument because equality is not restored when the balance 'swings the opposite way' - to use a very inappropriate phrase. Inequality still exists.
Personally, I think the gradual but relentless overriding of a majority, the undermining of social responsibilities, the flaunting of the law, the insiduous spread of the relativist 'What is truth?' idea, are designed either to grind the majority into a pathetic appeasing mass of sheep or to create a socially-engineered dislocation and bloody and irretrievable polarisation of society into radical and irreconcilable sectors. If anyone learned from 1984, it was Big Brother because they now use different tactics.
I really hate the word 'tolerant'.
It suggests a just contained resentment of something that you feel you have to 'put up with'.
Yuck.
Quote: zooo @ October 13, 2007, 2:08 PMI really hate the word 'tolerant'.
It suggests a just contained resentment of something that you feel you have to 'put up with'.
Yuck.
I have sympathy with that view but what word would you use?
When I say 'I am tolerant' I mean definition No 2a. below:
Main Entry: tol·er·ance
Pronunciation:
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1: capacity to endure pain or hardship : endurance, fortitude, stamina
2 a: sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own b: the act of allowing something : toleration
3: the allowable deviation from a standard; especially : the range of variation permitted in maintaining a specified dimension in machining a piece
4 a (1): the capacity of the body to endure or become less responsive to a substance (as a drug) or a physiological insult especially with repeated use or exposure <developed a tolerance to painkillers>; also : the immunological state marked by unresponsiveness to a specific antigen (2): relative capacity of an organism to grow or thrive when subjected to an unfavorable environmental factor b: the maximum amount of a pesticide residue that may lawfully remain on or in food
we get the society we deserve people, i don't like this country much myself these days but what can you do? I'm leaving for a non capatilist(sp) country next summer hopefully, it's either that or become a politician (which, lets face it, would achieve nothing.)
as for the the gay rights/ public indecency debate? i don't know what cottaging is so cannot comment on that. People should act with dignity in public(and in private as well).
The problems will persist until we stop putting up with them.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ October 13, 2007, 11:33 AMPositive Discrimination is just as wrong as Discrimination IMO.
Couldn't disagree more; discrimination is increasingly rarely intentional. Positive discrimination, however, is planned, calculated, and those administering it serioualy believe that it's a good thing. Therefore, positive discrimination is significantly worse than just plain-old discrimination.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ October 13, 2007, 1:04 PMI am tolerant to homosexuals (as long as they are law abiding citizens) but cannot condone sexual activities in public for whatever reason.
If other people are intolerant towards homosexuals BECAUSE they are homosexuals, then that is just plain wrong too but a completely different topic.
Unfortunately, minorities of all types now seem to be actively seeking to see themselves as being victimised, persecuted and so on. It's an effect of the compensation society as much as anything else. Big sigh.
And on the subject of this whole firemen incident, I honestly don't know where to start with how stupid it is.
In any case, I am increasingly of the opinion that it should not be possible to gain financial compensation (in many but not all cases), and not at all fine, the authorities. The only effect is on us, the innocent taxpayer, who have to have our hard-earned taxes diverted away from the services we pay for, and/or see said services decline. Fining the Met over the De Menezes shooting incident, for example, I would make impossible. To take even more money from an already overstretched public service just has no basis in reality. Yes there needs to be some way in which bodies can be penalised, but financially is not only not the answer, but utterly f**king backwards. Less money means more corners cut.
Quote: Aaron @ October 13, 2007, 3:30 PMUnfortunately, minorities of all types now seem to be actively seeking to see themselves as being victimised, persecuted and so on. It's an effect of the compensation society as much as anything else. Big sigh.
In my (humble) opinion this is a load of bollus. Positive discrimination is the result of a government that has no idea how to face social problems, not of antagonistic minorities. It is wrong, but it is also wrong because it deflects attention from the underlying issues. Discrimination is still rife and public and we don't know how to face it.
Sorry for getting tetchy before though. I'm easily tetched.