Gay Male Sexuality Is Under Attack From Without AND Within

There are racist gay men. This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, given racism is pretty entrenched across the human species. I once had to call an ex-boyfriend to come "rescue" me from a date with a man ranting on about how awful black people are. They are out there.

Owen Jones has written a comment piece on racism among gay men. Needless to say it has conflated some actual racism with some personal sexual preferences. When you are on a "dating" app (or back in the days of Gaydar for oldsters like me) you are presenting what you are and what you want out into the world in the hopes of finding others who share, or mirror, your desires. Perhaps you only want intelligent men for a long term relationship. Maybe you desire men with big arms for a fling. It could be you find only white men attractive. These are not necessarily stating you hate stupid people, people with smaller arms or non-white people. But it is saying that for the purposes of a relationship (or just sex) you have certain desires in mind.

Sexuality is a beautifully complex thing. I'm very much broad-minded about what I find attractive. I find a lot of looks, attitudes and minds attractive for many different reasons. But I also have a couple of "types" of men that I find EXTREMELY attractive. And a few (leather wearers beware) I find extremely unattractive. I couldn't change those desires even if I wanted to. So demanding that people become open to finding things attractive that they don't is a bit much. Should gay men starting trying to find women attractive as to not do so would be misogynistic? I think not!!!!

Unfortunately this sort of ludicrous suggestion helps others pretend racism doesn't exist. Focus on the real stigmas and racism going on out there and stop policing sexuality.

He also finds objectifying certain races problematic. I objectify men with big arms. I can thus quite understand someone objectifying men for another facet of their personality or appearance. The idea it is racist to find a certain skin tone attractive but okay to find only a certain gender attractive is messy at best.

Owen Jones is wandering extremely close to "conversion therapy" territory and towards suggesting male homosexuality itself is problematic. Must we all be pansexuals? Is that where we are heading? Is there no value in individuality?

People with similar mindsets also oppose the "culture" of muscle worship among gay men. This culture is much overblown, and is mainly limited to "the scene". Unfortunately many gay men in prominent positions are part of that scene and forget that out here in the real world male homosexuality is a lot more diverse. Considering muscle worship to be unhealthy due to the body image problems it may cause is a bit much when we encourage bear/cub culture at the same time.

The real issue is this sort of criticism has been internalised by many gay men who nod along in shame when some progressive comes along to browbeat them back into line. It is long past time we stop cow-towing to these puritanical busy-bodies who not only want to get into our bedrooms but want to get into our fantasises.

I would say "we didn't beat conservative busy-bodies only to allow progressive ones to control our sexuality" but can't as we haven't beat the conservative busy-bodies. Oh we thought we had but they've been quietly beavering away... Our Government has many plans to block porn, from adults as well as children, of which this is just the latest example.

If you don't want Christians telling you who to fuck, you'd better start stopping everyone else making similar demands. Otherwise we'll be back to the 1980s in no time at all.

Don't just nod ashamedly in the corner. Fight for the right to love and fuck however you damn well want to. Resist the puritans at every turn!

Jesus Land: A Memoir by Julie Scheeres

Julie Scheeres had a shitty childhood. Now you might think you've had a shitty childhood and feel you could hold your own in the Shitty Childhood Championships but, unless you have a particularly harrowing story or were her brother David, it is unlikely to be as shitty as Scheeres. She grew up in a fundamentalist Christian household with parents who she paints as unloving and scary. Her father beat her adopted brothers brutally. Her mother had an intercom system set up so she could monitor conversations anywhere in the house.

She also experienced sexual abuse from her older adoptive brother, Jerome, who made her young life a living hell. Meanwhile her brother David suffered racist abuse on an almost daily basis growing up in "Hicksville" as a black adopted member of a white family.

And what did the two of them get for their troubles? They got sent to Escuela Caribe, a Christian reform school in the Dominican Republic, where they were subjected to emotional and physical abuse "for their own good".

Sounds like a depressing book right? But instead Scheeres manages to maintain a balanced look back on her youth weaving in humourous episodes and giving full and balanced perspectives on all involved (rather than the deeply bitter perspective one could reasonably accept from someone who has been through what she went through). But above all else the love she had for her brother David shines through and this book is really a story about how they stuck it out together dreaming of a better life.

This is a story of religious excess, abuse, racism and of family. And it is one I'll admit to shedding a tear over in the final pages. Scheeres really doesn't hold back much detail on what happened to her which gives this book the credibility that many memoirs I've read recently desperately lack.

There's more on the abusive atmosphere at Escuela Caribe here.

Between The EDL And The Religious Fundies: East End Gay Pride

In my most recent post I made clear my dislike, abhorrence even, of the English Defense League. As any long term reader will know one of my little "ticks" is my deep, near irrational, hatred for nationalism. Even just having the word "English" in the title is likely to put me off. There's little in their views or beliefs that I can find even remotely of interest.

And as most of you will know, I'm no fan of the religious especially those of a fundamentalist bent. If you base your beliefs on the irrational mutterings of just the one book then I'm afraid we're unlikely to get on. Especially if your beliefs include homophobia and other prejudices. It's just not my thing.

So you can imagine my moral confusion over the latest controversy: East End Gay Pride. It seemed simple enough. In February some stickers appeared declaring East London a "gay free zone". Some thought they were put there by Muslims, others by the EDL to show Muslims in a bad light. In any case it soon emerged a group was gathering to organise a pride event, supposedly to show that the LGBT community were here, queer and everyone better get used to it.

This group was, from the off, seen by many local LGBT groups as an EDL front, based mainly on Facebook postings. Many LGBT groups in the area, especially the more left wing ones, were aghast (mainly quite rightly really) that the EDL should be involved and were upset that a pride event might upset "community relations" (a concept that, to be honest, fills me with such a rage that I can barely begin to to express it in writing).

And eventually, in the last few days, things have descended to the point where the pro and anti camps have been arguing incessantly.

Today brought revelations from gay group Imaan that the principal organiser Raymond Berry had links to the EDL. Damning stuff, and he's quickly been removed from the official site for the April the 2nd event.

But this all leads me to the wonder: even if this event is totally organised by the EDL, something I don't believe and suspect some of the organisation is being done properly, it is clearly labelled as pride event, it's clearly labelled as being "non-political" (whether that's possible at an LGBT pride event is up for debate) and political signs are explicitly banned. So what is the issue?

The EDL obviously think, quite rightly too, that a gay pride event in the East End is one way to show up the homophobia of a great number (if not all) of Muslims in the area and no obvious political protest need be added to it. And instead of Muslims in the area, and their LGBT supporters, showing clearly this isn't the case by EMBRACING the event they are desperately trying to ensure it gets cancelled so as to avoid highlighting any controversy. They claim pride is meant to be about community cohesion and building links between groups. Where is this in the history books?

Pride is meant to be confrontational, in your face and argument worthy. It's meant to be about highlighting and combating homophobia. What possible reason could the local community have for not wanting this event, if handled correctly and not demonstrating Islamophobic tendencies in either discriminating against those involved or racist/insulting signs, other than homophobia? Absolutely, with the EDL involved, extreme caution must be used and concerns raised. But if the answers are "this is an LGBT pride event to show solidarity against the recent anti-gay stickers", then what's the problem??

So I have to say, with a little regret as I completely see where the local community and LGBT groups are coming from, "No to an EDL rally, YES to East End Gay Pride". I hope the LGBT community shows itself in force and makes sure this is a demonstration of hope over hate rather than just hate against another minority.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Disturbing Images From The Western World

Whilst the world's attention is focussed on the horrific but also exhilarating revolutions occurring in the Arab countries of the Middle East and North Africa, other equally disturbing images have been coming from within our own midst.

Hate Comes To Orange County



I find this video almost too upsetting to watch. Muslims families being tormented and insulted by protesters waving American flags whilst elected US officials spread hate among the crowd. I can almost hear the echoes of the fascists in the 1930s and their anti-Jewish rhetoric. Awful stuff, and we are just not condemning this enough.

EDL Thugs

The English Defense League. It's everything I've worried about when I've spoken about English nationalism on here before. Now they bring in violent unionist imagery (no, I do not understand that either, we're English but we support the British cause? Hmm...). They are just a bunch of thuggish little boys terrified of the Other. We must oppose them thoroughly and consistently wherever they go.

The German Question

German interior minister reopens bitter row over Muslim integration. Certainly, Islam is not part of traditional German culture. Nothing controversial there, that's just a historical statement. But I don't think that's what is being said here, and we all know that. The wink, wink, nod, nod of the anti-Islam crowd is almost as disgusting as what they actually say.

"To say that Islam belongs in Germany is not a fact supported by history."

Well some interpretations of German history might suggest Jews don't belong in Germany (they've spent more time as pariahs than they have as equal German citizens throughout Germany's complex history). But you wouldn't say that because that would sound pretty damn disturbing. Are we to get rid of everyone in our countries whose presence isn't backed up by history? And what history are we talking about? Modern or ancient? Perhaps the German people don't belong there either as my memory of Germany 65 million years ago certainly doesn't back up their claim on residence either. History is useful, interesting and complicated. But it's not a Bible. We make our own destinies whilst learning from our history. But Germany seems to be just repeating the same old mistakes.

It's time we stood up and said no more. I'm no fan of Islam. To me it's just another silly religion. But that doesn't mean I do not support Muslims rights to their beliefs nor that I think they are some holier than thou angels without any issues themselves. But we must have a frank and honest debate not a "Them and us" one. The West needs to wake up to the hate it is brewing before it's too late.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Phil Woolas: Really Labour? Really??

When Harriet Harman said "It is not part of Labour politics to try to win elections by saying things that are not true." regarding the decision of an election court to overturn the Oldham East and Saddleworth election, I thought it wasn't enough. I made my feelings known that I felt her, and other senior Labour figures, complete disregard for the racial hatred stirring content of the leaflets was unacceptable.

Now I know why she tempered her words, and I feel somewhat sympathetic to her plight. She tempered her words because even what she did say (that Phil Woolas' lying was bad enough to make him person non grata in the Labour party) was controversial enough with her Parliamentary colleagues. They have attacked her for abandoning a "colleague" so "quickly" (!).

To us Liberal Democrats, from our partisan position, this is laughable. But it's understandable that the Labour party stuck by Phil Woolas during the court procedures. However, once he was found guilty, they made the right decision to disown him.

The Labour MPs belief that it's unacceptable to have a court overturn an election result seems silly given it was based on a law passed by Parliament. This wasn't a court creating a new law or interpreting the law in a new and different way. This was a court just going by the book.

The other part of their argument ("it ain't over until it's over") is that Phil Woolas is still planning to appeal the decision and that the Labour party should stick by him until all possible avenues of appeal are explored. This would be fine if it wasn't for the content of the leaflets he issued during the May campaign. They can read them for themselves. By defending Phil Woolas they are, in part, defending these leaflets. They must realise this.

I saw many Labour activists getting angry with their MPs last night, I saw more than a few former Lib Dem voters saying things like "Thanks Labour MPs for reminding me that I shouldn't vote for your party ever again" and I saw a lot of left wingers wondering how MPs could get so passionate about defending a discredited party member when they don't seem quite so passionate about fighting "the cuts".

Harriet Harman called this correctly and the Labour MPs have called it very, very wrongly indeed. With letters like this, they are in danger of annoying their base, their new post-Coalition voters and just about everyone else.

I just hope the angry Labour membership are able to convince them to change their mind before they get any deeper into a pit of burning stupidity.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

John Amaechi and The Crunch Bar

John Amaechi, a tall, handsome former NBA player, has been refused entry to the Crunch Bar on Manchester's Canal Street because he was "big, black and could be trouble".

Racist and discriminatory? Yes. As someone who is about the same height as Amaechi (6'9", 6'10") but white I too have had similar issues at gay bars. Either I've been denied entry as they thought I might be a straight troublemaker (only ever solved when one of my more "acceptably gay" mates would come out and rescue me), or given conspiratorial whispers by the door staff who'd ask me things like "Mate, you know this is a bar full of queers right?".

John Amaechi (a man whose autobiography shows to be one of the sweetest, soft natured people around) should not have been denied entry to a gay bar. I'd hope the LGBT population of Manchester show him some solidarity and stop patronising the Crunch bar. Hit them where it hurts and frequent places with less racist, heightist door staff.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Immigration Isn't The Problem

With the Tories wanting to impose artificial limits on immigration, a move that seems completely insane if put up against their belief in free enterprise and support for the business community, it comes as some relief to see Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats offering some sanity in the immigration debate.

The Liberal Democrats are considering a plan to channel immigration to certain areas of the country.

Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg told BBC One's Andrew Marr show the South East of England was facing pressure on resources due to its rising population.

He said other countries had shown it was "relatively easy" to target immigration at areas with proven labour shortages and away from crowded ones.

But he rejected Conservative calls for an annual cap on immigration.

"David Cameron wants to enter into a Dutch auction now, entering into implausible caps that can't work, that don't work, that we know round the world doesn't work.

"It might work in his focus groups but it is not actually going to produce the cohesive Britain that I want to see," he told BBC1's Andrew Marr Show.

"What has gone wrong in the immigration debate is that we have now had decades of tough talk and administrative incompetence from both Conservative and Labour governments."

Now this sounds like a fairly sensible plan and when combined with the rest of the Lib Dems immigration and asylum policies (including some tougher measures such as reintroducing exit checks) it seems to me that they are ignoring some of the latent racism in this country and going instead for sensible, industry friendly but also community friendly policies.

Which is much better than some of the proposals from some of the other "third" parties out their such as UKIP (who came second at the 2009 European Elections), who propose that the Government should be allowed to decide what one wears in public.

The burka and other face-covering veils worn by Muslim women should be banned, the UK Independence Party says.

Ex-UKIP leader Nigel Farage, who leads UKIP's 13 MEPs in Brussels, told the BBC's Politics Show they were a symbol of an "increasingly divided Britain".

He also said they "oppressed" women and were a potential security threat.

Let me make something clear: I hate burkas. I dislike the idea of someone sexualising men to the point where they must hide their body as they fear even letting a man look at them. I find it quite insulting. But I'm sure some people find my sexuality uncomfortable and dislike the fact I go places with my boyfriend. I don't expect them to tell me I can't go somewhere because I make them uncomfortable and thus I don't expect anyone to tell someone they can't cover themselves in fabric (for that is, when you really think about it, all they are doing) in public because others don't like it. What someone wears and what someone believes are not the problem. We are hardly going to solve the problems of isolated communities in our country by upsetting and insulting the beliefs of some of those communities! So perhaps we can stop this idea of letting the Government have the power to say "You can't wear that" (given they already abuse every other power we ever let them take) and instead focus on bringing isolated communities closer to the rest of society through dialogue and education.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Tear Down These Walls

Last year we had the 20th anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall. We, here in the west, engaged in a round of back slapping and moral grandstanding as we bemoaned the futility and sheer brutality of a regime that would install a wall to keep it's population from leaving (to places it didn't want them going anyway). People were shot, drowned and blown up in their efforts to escape and those who were caught were sent to prison for their "crimes". As many as 200 people lost their lives in the 20+ years of the walls existence.

All very disturbing, disgusting and completely unjustifiable. But we have dark secrets too. Our supposedly free societies engage in something not too dissimilar and cause a great deal more death and suffering. But we don't want to keep anyone in our countries. No... we want to keep people in their own countries. Whilst the aim might be slightly different... the outcome is the same.

Israel is to construct a barrier on it's southern border with Egypt. This is not a defensive barrier. Egypt and Israel's relations are actually pretty good. This is purely an anti-immigration barrier. Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, said "This is a strategic decision to secure Israel's Jewish and democratic character". For which read: we don't want any of those foreign sorts around here. Refugee's will, he claims, still be able to claim asylum but I suspect they will be turned around at the border crossings and told to claim asylum in that famously welcoming country, Egypt. But this is hardly Israel's worst wall. The "Security Fence" on the West Bank was designed to defend Israel from attack. This is understandable. What is less understandable is that this involved it only following 15% of the internationally recognised border between Israel proper and the occupied territories. I.e. it grabs land from the very people it's meant to be stopping from attacking Israel. That is sure to bring them round. Despite it being declared illegal by the International Court of Justice, construction is now nearly complete.

Far worse than this is the USA's wall on it's border with Mexico. Rather than attempt to help it's neighbour deal with it's crime and poverty issues, it decided to spend billions building walls at the easiest crossing points. This forced those seeking a better life in the country built upon immigration to move outwards into the deserts where thousands have lost their lives. Thousands. Of course nobody cares. They are breaking the law, attempting to illegally immigrate. Why have sympathy for them, those criminals?

That I believe is what a lot of people in the German Democratic Republic thought about their own "law breakers" who attempted to flee for a better life in the west. Why have sympathy for them, those traitors?

And the list goes on... walls in Morocco one stopping people getting into the EU, the other "defending" Morocco from people in Western Sahara (a country Morocco claims is part of their own territory!). Walls in Belfast, Cyprus, Korea. Etc.

I think it's time we started taking stock of our own civilisation. Can we justify criticising the former DDR, when we continue it's policies just in reverse? Who needs informers when you have a CCTV camera on every corner? Who needs political prisoners when you have enemy combatants? Who needs a Berlin Wall when you can have one of your very own?!

We must change our ways. And soon.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

Extremist Nationalist Organisations Linked To BNP: No Surprise There!

The Herald is reporting Scottish Defence League members having BNP connections despite the BNP banning such things.

As I've reported before, nationalist organisations having links to racist parties are ten a penny. Just look at the English Democrats and their England First Party friends, reported during the European Elections earlier this year.

Nationalism and racism don't need to go together, even an old fashioned Unionist like myself can admit that, it's just sad that they usually seem to. Well sad for the nationalists... ammunition for those of us who believe in a united, progressive future.

Fight the fascists, the racists and the nationalists who seek to destroy our tolerant country and create a white version of the Taliban, hellbent on creating a fixed, inflexible culture. Down with religious fundamentalists. Down with racist scum. Down with all who wish to impose their way of life on others.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

For The Flag

This country is full of, so-called, "patriots". Most of them don't even appear not know which country they are in (i.e. the United Kingdom NOT England) but regardless of that I'm flabbergasted at the disrespect these people show to even their own flags.

There's a pub near me, thankfully closing down soon, called the Royal George. Outside they fly, quelle and surprise, the St George's flag. Now I'm putting aside my unionism for this post so no insults from me here. But these flags are shabby, dirty and ill cared for. I have to ask: why bother? What is the point of making a big show of having flags, things which most countries have laws protecting how they are displayed, and then not caring for them. It's hardly patriotic, but based on my travels around London and Kent the flags there are actually far better than some. I've been past some pubs that actually have HOLES in their flags.

The same was true for the Greenwich Police Station who, until recently, was flying a dirty, holed Union flag. This is a Government body, and they can't even fly a decent looking flag. If there was some deeply interesting history behind the flag, perhaps they can be forgiven, but I doubt that was the case.

I know, we don't have a tradition of respecting our flags like America does nor do we have any rules or regulations governing civilian use of flags. In fact the Union flag isn't even, officially, the flag of the country (it is officially a flag of the monarch). But still... if one is to claim to be patriotic (which I think flying a flag is a statement of) why don't people care for them more?

Let's look at two examples from yesterdays "English" "Defence" League protest.

Firstly we have a bizarrely featured Union flag. Let us first ignore the strange juxtaposition of "English" and "Union flag" and instead focus on how they are holding that flag. Surely, if these folks are so passionate about their country, they would be treating the flag a little less like a "Happy Birthday" banner flying off a motorway bridge?

Then we have these rather delightful fellows holding DEFACED St George's flags. These people need to learn about flag poles. But then again this might involve some sort of education which they are clearly lacking.

Despite my rather irrational, and rabid, dislike for the St. George's flag, I'm not looking forward to the World Cup. Around that time people will drape St George's flags out their windows onto dirty walls, hang them from their cars and generally cause me to grow increasingly angry at their obviously FAUX patriotism.

I know, this is very petty stuff. But this a blog and a blog's main raison d'etre is the petty stuff not fit to print! Honestly folks... if you are going to do something, at least do it properly!!

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

Anti-Fascist Violence

It is quite obvious to me, as someone who happens to be white, that there is a very deep undertone of racism in this country. You go anywhere in the country and meet with white people, when there is nobody of a different race about, and there's a high chance somebody will start a conversation about how "things have gone too far" or "send the immigrants home". You only need to read the Sun or the Daily Mail to know this is something the media loves to tap in to.

So when the English Defence League does one of it's never-ending protests, it might be helpful if the supposedly rational, decent folk who oppose them DON'T BECOME VIOLENT! What the BBC's news story fails to reflect is that the violence came from the anti-fascist side. I hate fascists, racists and nationalists. I believe that those who support such creeds are unpatriotic (they need to read up on who we fought against in WWII) and indecent.

But I also hate violence and what I really hate is muppets causing violence against these bastards. Given that we live in a country with lots of "hidden" racism, the way to win those people round is not by attacking these sorts of organisations physically but by winning the arguments. The Nazi's weren't defeated by Communist's attacking them in the streets before 1933, it only made them stronger in the eyes of many who feared the Communists. We must stand strong against racism, but do it sensibly, peacefully and decently. If we don't then the nationalist scum win out!

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

You Know I Deplore Violence Of All Descriptions...

...but I did enjoy this video.



I know, I'm a bad person. I actually feel bad for Nick Griffin at some points, but then I think... nah he's a bastard.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

The English Democrats: Reasonable Nationalists?

The English Democrats say on their FAQs:

Politically our policies are neither left nor right. We have a commitment to a mixed economy, but also require protection for the vulnerable and would advocate developing public ownership policies for key strategic industries. We are implacably opposed to globalisation, economies based on "cheap labour" and the offshoring of English jobs.

That is certainly laudable. They also state:

"English & Proud" - that's what English Democrats are - why should it be implied that you are a "Bigot" or a "Racist" simply because you are proud of your Country - we English Democrats are simply pro English.

Here, here I say. Being patriotic for one's country (even if I don't agree on the semantics here) should never be considered racist. But then, why are they allowing the England First Party to hang out at their conferences?

England First has as their first part of their brief/manifesto (sic) the following:

1. Stop all further immigration and start a programme of voluntary repatriation of non-European immigrants back to their lands of ancestral origin

Erm... that's racist (or racialist depending on how one likes to use these words). That's really racist. "Ancestral origin"? There's being against multiculturalism and then there's being against people because of their "origin". They are rather different things both in reality and in moral terms.

But not only does the England First Party offer it's support to the English Democrat candidates in some elections (something the EDs are powerless to stop), it also is allowed to speak at ED conferences. They even get photo ops with the parties European election candidates!! See here for pictures!

I hope the EDs have issued a firm denunciation of the close relations with the EFP, otherwise their claims to be tolerant English patriots who are neither of the left or right spectrum's of politics are really very hollow indeed.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

March For England Seems To Not Understand Respecting Our Troops

When our troops came under verbal attack from some radical anti-war protesters in Luton recently, they maintained their professionalism and dignity in the face of the insults and taunts of the protesters. Some who had come to the parade to pay tribute to the troops were, somewhat understandably, undignified in their response but the police managed to maintain some form of order. That day served as a reminder of the professionalism of our armed forces and police, and our protection of the rights of free speech for all (something we need to see more of admittedly!) no matter how repugnant that speech is.

Alas, some organisation named "March For England" organised a peaceful protest that got out of hand over the weekend in Luton, with slogans such as "No Sharia Law in the UK" and "Respect our Troops". Whilst I very much agree with the sentiments, I somewhat think the organisers missed out on one major thing: this sort of protest is bound to draw in the wrong elements and in so doing bring dishonour upon the troops whom they claim to be defending.

And some of the protesters this time certainly sound like lovely representatives for the cause of respecting our troops:

"Groups of young men in balaclavas and England shirts chanted outside the city centre and one balacava-clad protester held a Rottweiler on a chain, while others clashed with police in riot gear. One Asian man was hit across the face with a banner and left with a bloody nose."

Mmm... English nationalism at it's best. These people should be roundly condemned for allowing this sort of a mess to be carried out in the name of respecting our troops! It is a hideous insult to their courage and reserve.

Our British soldiers deserve a better tribute than this rabble of "English" people.

If we are to stand up for the rights of our decent citizens and our honourable troops then we must do so peacefully, decently and with integrity. If we are to defend our way of life from sharia law, and religious stupidity, we must do so through the proper channels (the law, our Government and the way our society works). We must integrate our communities and not allow differences which sow terror and violence among our population.

Riots, racist attacks and disorder serve only to bring our country into disrepute, and stoke tensions in areas that need few reasons for outbreaks of violence. We must engage with our minority communities and bring them into our society and not show them reasons to avoid integration such as has been done here.

How can we imagine that by showing our way of life to be full of hate and violence we are going to encourage the young minority community member to engage with mainstream society? I'm not a Christian but surely reaching out with love (not tolerance, we don't wish to tolerate people, we need to embrace them as our neighbours!) is far better than doing so with hate.

We might achieve a little more.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

Charlie Brooker Says Everything I Wanted To Say But Didn't Know How

In his latest Guardian article Charlie Brooker distilled my thoughts, made them witty, and put them on paper. Is this man psychic? No but he sure is clever...

It was the first time I was explicitly told that racism was unpleasant and it was a lesson served with a side order of patriot fries. Or rather, chips. Our headmaster had fought for his country, and for tolerance, all at once. That's what I understood it meant to be truly "British": to be polite, and civil and fair of mind.

Well said indeed.

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

Flu Balls Again

Time for more of the really stupid things to come out from all this flu malarky. Let's start with something which I hope is a failed attempt at a joke on the BBC's Have Your Say

Added: Wednesday, 29 April, 2009, 08:35 GMT 09:35 UK

Yet more scaremongering. How can miniscule microbes possibly cause illness? Everyone knows that illness is caused by the miasma, so just stay away from smelly areas and you'll be fine. They said the millenium bug would kill us all, but it didn't.

harry leicester

The miasma seems to suggest a humourous take on other posters stupidity but the poor spelling and the mention of Y2K suggests perhaps he really is just stupid...

I think the Egyptians may not have been paying attention as they seem to think the world is suffering from the speedy spread of flu through pigs (who I assume fly business class). Is there a large pig importation business in Egypt? Whilst there's a Coptic Christian community I'm guessing as a mostly Muslim country it's not likely Mexico or America send many pigs over. I believe this may be what we call "overkill".

There's an argument in favour of continuing to call this outbreak swine flu if ever I saw one. What if we were all calling it Mexican flu? I shudder to think what might have happened to Egypt's Mexican tourists at the hands of these idiots.

Warning: The fundies have discovered swine flu and much amusement follows.

The Mystery in it all. Just remember there are Facilities(Labs) That Housed Terrible Strains of Viruses. And I do remember sometime back in the news where Mice were missing from a N.J. Lab Containmented with some Deadly Disease.
It always makes me Wonder when I hear about these Strange New Diseases, if they were not Man Made in Some Medical Lab, and Some Crazy Mad Scientist brought out to the Us Regular Citizens to see what would happen and how it will be Controlled. I know this sounds all Sci-Fiction...But, When Mice come up Missing and that wasn't the only news story in months past.
It makes me wonder....If, this isn't a Government Project?
Remember, O Preacher he was all about the White Man giving terrible Illnesses to Black PPl.

It also seems they've discovered the shift key helps with capital letters but sadly have yet to master the art.

Not to be left out the racists are onto it too!

I was actually going to make a post about this. I'm absolutely infuriated at how our worthless fucking government has handled it. In Mexico, they've issues statements telling people not to share food utensils, not to kiss, not to shake hands, to take precautions... here, they've said "Wash your hands". And that's it. There hasn't really even been any substantial public warning that I'm aware of. And, again, Obama is sitting around trying to figure out how to legalize millions of illegals.

I'm not eating out much right now, and I'll only go to a restaurant where I know for a fact immigrants aren't cooking the food. Which around here means almost entirely Asian food, because those are the only places near us that are family run and you can trust who's in the kitchen. Which is cool with me. I'm also avoiding raw foods, as you never know who may have handled them on the way to your plate.

Some people have even suggested that it could have been something started by Al Qaeda. It would be a brilliant plan... infect the US via Mexico, since there's no effective border. There's no proof of that, but it does seem ridiculous that the government isn't looking into it. Those people have been trying to modify the flu for years from what I understand.

Quemaqua, Overwritten.net 13 Comments [4/26/2009 5:59:43 PM]

Isn't it wonderful how a crisis can bring us all together? Fingers crossed that should things take a course for the worse here in Britain we might be able to call upon a little bit of the Dunkirk/Blitz spirit to see us through...

This blogger works for nothing but the joy of writing but always appreciates things bought from his wishlist

Gay Fascists

No I'm not talking about some prissy queens down the local gay bar who police the attire and attitude of any chicken or newbie who happens to troll inside. I'm talking about fascists, who happen to be gay.

Last month Jörg Haider died in a crash, allegedly as he drove away from a gay bar slightly inebriated. He was famous as a former leader of the Austrian Freedom Party and as a neo-Fascist. There's something that doesn't sit right with me that a man could be a member of a xenophobic organisation and who could controversially occasionally praise some of Nazi Germany's policies and yet be gay as well. Forgetting about the sheer morality of it, surely the fact his policies are watered down versions of the policies of a regime that incarcerated, tortured and murdered thousands of gay men would make you think "Hmm... as someone who likes a bit of that sort of thing maybe I don't want to get involved with that sort of organisation"?

But then you have the more difficult to label Pim Fortuyn of the Netherlands. He distanced himself from the far right but was a very virulent anti immigration campaigner before his untimely death (p.s. gay, xenophobic people seem to meet untimely deaths). How can someone who understands prejudice be prejudiced against others for something they can't control, such as the place of their birth? It's something that's always baffled me about homophobic members of ethnic minorities. I just want to shake them and scream "You are a person who others regard with hate simply because of the colour of your skin and you DARE judge me because of who I sleep with??"

Ernst Röhm, the biggie, a Nazi higher up and in charge of the infamous SA. What was he thinking? I mean really, what was he thinking? Sure he died before the Holocaust but still, really, the Nazi party?? Head of the heavies no less! The one's who helped beat up opponents. Nice.

Now sure, you can't connect homosexuality with an inclination towards fascism. There's way too many heterosexuals with blood on their hands for that. But it does confuse me.

When I was a teenager and denying my sexuality I allowed myself to embrace Christianity, the Conservative Party and a low level form of racism (the type found in the Sun or the Daily Mail). When I finally admitted my sexuality I realised what an utter arsehole I was being embracing things that were based on hatred. I know, it took a big dose of "Oh God now I'm the one being hated" to finally knock some sense into me, but at least I got the good sense to change my beliefs and that is one of the reasons I love being gay. In fact during my descent out of religion I even conceived that maybe God maybe me gay just to teach me humility and respect for others whoever they might be. So I just don't understand gay men being such haters... but I see it all the time. My first boyfriend Stephen hated people of different races and I remember once breaking off a date after my date revealed his deep hatred of black people and an undeclared love for Margaret Thatcher.

You just have to accept that everyone is a jerk in one way or another...

Don't Gloat Over The BNP Membership List Being Published

That would be mean and cruel. Everyone deserves the right to privacy even if it is very amusing to see so called "British Lions" terrified at the idea of people finding out what political party they belong too. Certainly showing the sort of bravery I'd expect of spineless racist scum.

Let us instead gloat on a little titbit that the gormless traitor Nick Griffin has revealed:

In a statement on the party's website, Mr Griffin said he had lodged a complaint with Dyfed-Powys Police on the grounds that the publication breached human rights and data protection laws.

He told the BBC's the party would be using the Human Rights Act to try to protect the identities of its members, despite the BNP being against the European legislation.

Is that not the most amusing piece of hypocrisy?? A party whose raison-d'etre is to remove human rights from others not like them is using their least liked piece of legislation to protect it's own members.

Racists, and those with a limited understanding of the concept of British citizenship (something I'm sure you're well aware I believe should not be based on nationality or ethnicity), are traitors whose efforts are in direct opposition to the efforts of our country during the war to fight the Nazis and ensure we did not fall into, as Winston Churchill called it, "the abyss of a new Dark Age". That is what they would represent to our country... a new Dark age, and we must thus ensure we do not sit back and allow their hypocrisy and their cowardice to go unremarked upon.

As a Brit who stands removed from both nationalism and racism, there is little I despise more than the British National Party

Politics And Race

Barack Obama is the President-Elect of the United States of America and all it right with the world. Except of course it isn't.

I was increasingly disturbed by all the harping on in the media about Obama being the first black President. They seemed to be making out that this was the end of all the silly racism. Bless them for their optimism but the world is the same today as it was the day before the election; there's just a little more hope around. And some of the crap the journalists were spewing was too stupid for words:

"America voted and realised, almost as an exhilarating afterthought, that it had become colour-blind." The Times

If they realised they were being colour-blind then they are not truly colour-blind are they? What a silly statement.

Or those people excited by Obama being black were totally overcome with excitement at the world being "post racial" now too. It can't be both, you can't be excited to have Obama as President because he's black and be post racial. It's a contradiction.

I respect the achievement of Barack Obama of reaching the top in a country with such a racist past as America has. But I don't respect those who focus so much on his race and then claim to be post-racial.

Personally I'm more excited about the following facts:

1) Barack Obama is not Dubya
2) Barack Obama is the first professor President since Woodrow Wilson. Yay for academics in power!
3) Barack Obama has an oratory gift unlike a certain 43rd President of the USA I know...

Over here in Blighty we are being asked "Could we have a black PM?" to which the answer is of course "Yes." But somehow people have managed to fill page after page of newsprint about the subject... as if somehow Britain NEEDS a black Prime Minister and SOON because otherwise we just aren't cool. Needless to say my view on this is: We don't need a white PM, nor a black one, nor do we require a female or a gay or a disabled PM. We need a good one, a decent one, a human one, an intelligent one. We should never judge those running for power on what they are but on who they are.

And finally one of my least favourite men in the country, Trevor Phillips, who seems to lack any of the talent of any member of the American Civil Rights movement. He says Britain's political system is "institutionally racist". For my non-British readers "institutional racism" is a buzz phrase here in Britain which describes racist organisations composed of people who may not themselves be racist. Yes people, organisations have feelings and prejudices too!! He goes on to bemoan the Labour parties lack of ethnic minority candidates (as if Labour should choose people based on their race for office). But he doesn't mind those progressive forward thinkers that live in the Conservative Party:

Mr Phillips said he believed the Conservatives had performed better than Labour in increasing the number of black and Asian parliamentary candidates.
"[The Conservatives] are less democratic. They are happier to impose candidates on the local parties."

Brilliant! Get rid of all that democracy and let's have some good old fashioned benevolent dictatorship. He goes on to say he doesn't favour imposing candidates which sort of makes the whole point of his interview pointless and obviously it's just an attempt to get his voice heard in the wake of Barack Obama's success. A pigmy standing on the shoulders of giants...

BNP Trying To Make A Martyr Out Of A Victim

**BBC News Story has been updated with clarification after I wrote this, good on them**

Habib Khan has quite rightly been sentenced to 8 years for the manslaughter of Keith Brown, his neighbour. Reading the BBC News story you get the sense this was just a fight that got out of hand, perhaps instigated by racism (it's not intentionally written that way but my underlying anti BNP stance is not dissuaded from getting this impression by the text). That is the story the BNP want you to believe.

This is not what happened and I believe it's an important point missed out by the BBC this time, playing into the hands of the BNP's take on events.

An earlier story, before the BNP began to spin things, suggests the dispute arose over property and this is backed up by a Daily Mail story which elaborates on the neighbours friendship that turned to hate over an issue with regard to Mr Khan's property refurbishments. Mr Brown certainly wasn't innocent in this, he and his son previously being actively violent in their attempts to stop Mr Khan's developments from continuing. Mr Khan should never have got violent with Mr Brown (a man with previous violence related crimes against his name) but I'm sure Mr Brown didn't act in a very reasonable way and given his history I think it's reasonable to believe Mr Khan was attempting, in the wrong way, to defend his son from violence.

Mr Khan deserves his sentence, Mr Brown did not deserve to die. But this was not a racist killing, this was a clash between two stupid, unreasonable old men, gone horribly wrong.