This is the video that John Waters does not want you to see.
His solicitors threatened RTE with legal action unless it was removed from RTE Player, and of course, the chronically spineless execs in Montrose duly complied. Even though Waters is a well-known journalist with a weekly column in the Irish Times, he seems to prefer to deal with robust criticism by litigation rather than through open debate.
Rory O'Neill thinks that John Waters is homophobic, and he expressed this view calmly and with restraint. So what's the big deal? I don't know if Waters is homophobic or not, but I do think he an arrogant, censorious, litigious eejit. That's my opinion, and in a supposed liberal democracy, I ought to have the right to freely express it.
If John Waters wants to refute any of these criticisms, why can't he do so in his Irish Times column? When such a respected and widely-read forum as the Irish Times is open to him every week, why does he need to resort to litigation and censorship to deal with his critics?
Methinks the eejit doth protest too much...
Rory ONeill - The Saturday Night Show 11-1-2014 by radiator2
UPDATE: The blogger Peter Ferguson (aka Humanisticus) has written an incisive, forensic analysis of Rory O'Neill's claim that John Waters, Breda O'Brien and the Iona Institute are homophobic. With regard to Waters, Ferguson refers to some rather nasty comments made by John Waters about "the gay lobby" in an interview with a UCD student newspaper two years ago. In my view, Ferguson rightly concludes that these comments display an "active irrational fear and hatred of homosexuals. It’s homophobia, even in it’s strictest form."
Alfie,
ReplyDeletegreat piece. Found Peter Ferguson's incisive also.
people call me a homophobe because im opposed to gay marriage and gay adoption. i can deal with it. if anything (God forbid) happened my sister and brother-in-law and their kids were up for adoption the following scenario could be a possibility at some stage in the future. A person who was born a man but was unhappy with his gender and went thru a sex change marries a person who was born a woman who similarly was unhappy with her gender and went thru a sex change. however, they are not comfortable with dressing in the clothes of their new gender and become transvestites. They adopt my niece and nephew. What i want to know is who does my niece and nephew call mam and dad - the chick with the dick who dresses like a woman or the man with the fanny who dresses like a bloke. and im not tryin to be a smart ass. call me a homophobe i couldnt giv a damn folks. ive asked people this question and the most common answer is - it doesnt matter so long as they are loved and protected. these hypocrites would be mortified if their own kids were adopted by transgender transvestites but they will never say it to avoid being labelled a backward catholic or a homophobe.
ReplyDeleteGrouch,
ReplyDeletehere's the thing: you don't give a toss if they call you it. Which is the way to go. You are gonna take it and stand your ground, not behave as the libel bully and reach for the censor lawyer. While I don't share you perspective I see absolutely nothing wrong with you expressing it. And it was funny.
sound anthony, i grew up in dublin, i can only imagine the slaggin little bollixes like i was and my mates wud giv to one of the lads if his folks were transgender transvestites, u belfast boys wud probably be way worse!
ReplyDeleteNo doubt we were. But people need to be able to express what they think
ReplyDelete@ Grouch - My question would be - Why would your niece and nephew in this circumstance call either adoptive parent mummy or daddy ? I' m assuming the transgendered people you are talking about would have names?
ReplyDeleteIt really would matter which one they called Mummy or which they called Daddy - children are less judgemental and more accepting than adults ... it is we parents and adults who place the norms and values onto children.
But just to answer the exact question you asked they would most likely refer to the parents in the gendered roles : So the person identified as male would be daddy and the person identified as female would be mummy.
As entitled as you are to your opinion on gay marriage or transgendered parenting - I would personally state it is very close minded and biased. Each and every person is entitled to their own identity and it is oppressive of anyone to try and deny that identity or demonise it.
Grouch,
ReplyDeleteIf the roles were reversed and RTE had censored an interview with John Waters last Saturday because he had condemned gay marriage or berated "the gay lobby" (as he calls it), I assure you that I would have written an article supporting John Waters's right to free expression and criticising those who sought to censor him through litigation. Indeed, in my experience, there are an awful lot of people in this country who claim to be liberals but would like to effectively outlaw the expression of ideas they deem repugnant.
As much as homophobia disgusts me, I do believe people have the right to be homophobes. Indeed, I do not think it should be a crime to hold and express opinions that the majority of us find odious. To take an even more extreme example, I do not believe a person should be imprisoned for having paedophilic thoughts or for believing that there should be no age of consent. However, if that person were to act on his beliefs and hurt a child - either directly or indirectly through buying child pornography - then he ought to be imprisoned for a long time.
I am instinctively suspicious of libel laws because, more often than not, they stifle open debate, shield the elite of society from proper scrutiny, and line the pockets of pettifoggers. Without free public discussion of opinions and ideas, there is no such thing as intellectual freedom. Thus, in these matters, the courts should be the very last resort rather than the first one.
when i said i can deal with people calling me a homophobe i wasnt stating that im a homophobe or admitting to being a homohobe, i just dont get upset if someone calls me a homophobe because im opposed to gay marriage and adoption. its their problem if they dont understand what the word homophobe means - a person who fears or hates homosexuals or homosexuality - which is the definition of that word. i am not a homophobe aine. just because i dont get pissed off when someone calls me a homophobe doesnt mean i accept that label.
ReplyDelete"So the person identified as male would be daddy and the person identified as female would be mummy." - thats where i have a problem - i genuinely have difficulty identifying the male or female as im sure a small child would too - and i dont like the idea of kids calling their parents by name, call me old fashioned but thats the way i am. Another thing, there are gay people, believe it or not, who don't believe in gay or transgender marriage and adoption - are they homophobes too?
where am i 'demonising' as you say, i was just asking a question about whos daddy and whos mammy. im not trying to deny their identity and there is nothing in what i wrote as far as i can see where that could be deduced. i am simply voicing my opposition to gay marriage and adoption which is different.
alfie, you say something similar -: "i do believe people have the right to be homophobes" - i agree with you there, but as with aine, i dont define myself as a homophobe even if people throw that at me. people can interpret opposition to gay or transgender marriage and adoption as homophobia, but i dont. i do not fear or hate anyone, except for the Transgender Terrorist Front. as for john waters, i slapped a section 31 on him years ago. one thing ur right about aine is i am close minded and biased but in my own opinion - on other issues. finally, i still amnt bothered, despite all of the above, if you wish to label me a homophobe. i love oscar wilde but if he wanted to adopt me id tell him to fuck off.