As noted in these pages before, the Daily Mail has a tendency towards hateful homophobia. But the cartoon reproduced in the New Statesman (I wouldn’t want to link direct to Littlejohn - the less traffic he gets the better, in my mind, and I don’t want to pollute my Tumblr with his execrable filth) really takes the biscuit. Horrific. I don’t want to put the cartoon on this blog - but go and see.
The front page of The Express is the most hateful piece of journalism since Jan Moir spewed bile at Stephen Gately the day before his funeral. But what is more horrific is the attitude of Supreme Court judge Lord Rodger (yes, that’s his real name). He clearly thought he was striking a blow for liberation and equality when he said gay people’s right to live freely must be protected.
He said: “Just as male heterosexuals are free to enjoy themselves playing rugby, drinking beer and talking about girls with their mates, so male homosexuals are to be free to enjoy themselves going to Kylie concerts, drinking exotically-coloured cocktails and talking about boys with their straight female mates.”
I am speechless in horror. I thought it was a wind up but, amazingly, it isn’t. Thoughts?
I’ll leave the last word to Caitlin Moran:
"I genuinely think reading the Express is a sign of mental illness.It’s actually worse than reading the Daily MALEVOICEOFPATRIACHALOPPRESSION"
What can we do about it?
A few well-written blogs have sprung up to attack Jan Moir’s homophobic attack on the recently-deceased Stephen Gately. So good, in fact, that they can be forgiven for being on Blogspot not Tumblr…
Charlie Brooker has also written a piece about it, to be published in Monday’s Guardian. Can’t wait to hear what he has to say about it all!
I’ll retweet some other comments as well. One of them contains some very foul language though - you have been warned.
This is 2009, isn’t it? When we’re all tolerant and homosexuality is acceptable? Thought so.
Except, it seems, at the Daily Mail, where Jan Moir has, in this article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1220756/Why-natural-Stephen-Gatelys-death.html), more than implied that Stephen Gateley’s death was the result of his homosexuality. Here is her conclusion (which I can barely bring myself to copy-and-paste):
"It is important that the truth comes out about the exact circumstances of his strange and lonely death.
As a gay rights champion, I am sure he would want to set an example to any impressionable young men who may want to emulate what they might see as his glamorous routine.
For once again, under the carapace of glittering, hedonistic celebrity, the ooze of a very different and more dangerous lifestyle has seeped out for all to see.”
"The ooze of a very different and more dangerous lifestyle" - which is being gay, right? So, heterosexual people never go clubbing and drinking? And heterosexual people never bring someone back with them after a night out? No, argues Jan Moir - it’s only gay people. And, if you are an impressionable young man who is gay, or thinking of being gay, you will die - so Jan Moir thinks anyway.
How is it possible for someone to even think this, let alone publish it?