Is Age and Generation an excuse for Widdicombes bigoted beliefs ?

[clairefromsomewhereinnort]

I d say not because there aren t many in Ann s generation as bigoted as her.

[Brillopad]

Is age an excuse for controlling ignorance.

[Underscore]

No.

[Lilac hills]

Who cares she’s more interesting than anyone else in there

[Marsh.]

It's a reason certainly, but it doesn't make it any less bigoted.

She's entitled to it, but let's not excuse it.

[poppsywoppsy]

I d say not because there aren t many in Ann s generation as bigoted as her.

I would say, you don't know what you are talking about.

How many more bashing Ann threads are you going to start.

[Jase.]

It's a reason certainly, but it doesn't make it any less bigoted.

She's entitled to it, but let's not excuse it.

This.

[Jack_]

Who cares she’s more interesting than anyone else in there

Correct, but that doesn't negate any serious discussion about her views. She can be both a great housemate and a terrible person, the two are always mutually exclusive no matter who it is

[Lilac hills]

Correct, but that doesn't negate any serious discussion about her views. She can be both a great housemate and a terrible person, the two are always mutually exclusive no matter who it is

Sure but there have been like 10000 threads on this already Were all just going round in circles

[T*]

she's a terrible human being and age is no excuse, it's not hard.

[Jack_]

Sure but there have been like 10000 threads on this already Were all just going round in circles

That's on season for you

[Jase.]

I don't get how she's a good housemate either. Outside of a few amusing moments all she's done is judge and roll her eyes :umm2:

[Lilac hills]

I don't get how she's a good housemate either. Outside of a few amusing moments all she's done is judge and roll her eyes :umm2:

I mean yeah relative to every other season she’s been very boring

But this is cbb21 we’re talking about

Literally nothing happens

You really start to appreciate the finer things, she’d fall into insignificance in a house with any more than 1other good housemate

[lewis111]

I don't get how she's a good housemate either. Outside of a few amusing moments all she's done is judge and roll her eyes :umm2:

She's been the only one since India left to cause any sort of conflict this series

[Jack_]

I don't get how she's a good housemate either. Outside of a few amusing moments all she's done is judge and roll her eyes :umm2:

That's literally why she's a good housemate though. The eye rolling, the prudishness and the self-censorship some of the housemates have felt around her are all AWFUL traits that I find annoying in a person, but in a pretty drab series she's been one of the only causes of tension because of it.

People who are difficult to live with usually make the best housemates

[GoldHeart]

I would say, you don't know what you are talking about.

How many more bashing Ann threads are you going to start.

There's an obsession :bored:

[Tom4784]

It's a reason certainly, but it doesn't make it any less bigoted.

She's entitled to it, but let's not excuse it.

Sums up what I think tbh.

[rusticgal]

It's hard to train a persons way of thinking when they have grown up in a generation that finds certain things unacceptable.
Ann has tolerated it to some extent...her eye rolling says it all though. Maybe it's not an excuse...but as much as we expect Ann to accept it and understand it..shouldnt we give her the same understanding and accept that it's very much a generation thing?

[Marsh.]

It's hard to train a persons way of thinking when they have grown up in a generation that finds certain things unacceptable.
Ann has tolerated it to some extent...her eye rolling says it all though. Maybe it's not an excuse...but as much as we expect Ann to accept it and understand it..shouldnt we give her the same understanding and accept that it's very much a generation thing?

I don't think anyone hasn't accepted they're her opinions and are formed via a different life experience, as are everyones. However, that doesn't give her the immunity from having her opinions and views questioned and examined by others. Particularly as, as a politician, her views are very much public.

It's not only her entitled to her views.

[Tom4784]

All people are allowed to have their views, other people are allowed to critique those views or anyone's views.

Ann is entitled to her homophobic views, everyone else is entitled to comment on their views. Age or generation is not a shield from criticism.

[Yaki da]

She doesn't have "bigoted beliefs" nor does she act like a bigot. She simply has different opinions to the currently fashionable views on certain issues. It's those of you who cannot deal with the fact that a person disagrees with you who are bigots.

[Paula D]

She doesn't have "bigoted beliefs" nor does she act like a bigot. She simply has different opinions to the currently fashionable views on certain issues. It's those of you who cannot deal with the fact that a person disagrees with you who are bigots.Well said, I've tried saying it over and over.

People don't get the irony of insisting that everyone hate someone because of their views and lifestyle.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Marsh.]

She doesn't have "bigoted beliefs" nor does she act like a bigot. She simply has different opinions to the currently fashionable views on certain issues. It's those of you who cannot deal with the fact that a person disagrees with you who are bigots.

Just like racists "simply have a different opinion".

Your statement has the depth of a puddle.

[smudgie]

Not entirely her age or her generation, more to do with her religion.
A mixture of all three give her a different view on it all, she doesn't like PDA's in general, again can be put down to all three.
I dont think she is anti homosexuals so much as the sanctity of marriage being for a man and a woman. She has said herself what goes on behind closed doors is not a problem to her.
If that is a bigoted view then so be it, but could the same be said for anyone discounting her right to those views based on her religion?
As long as she hadn't made a personal or malicious attack verbally or otherwise whilst in the house then I can't fault her as a housemate.

[Yaki da]

Just like racists "simply have a different opinion".

Another word like "Homophobe" that has no objective meaning and is used to suppress dissenting views on certain issues.

Your statement has the depth of a puddle.

Whereas yours was full of profound insights.

[Marsh.]

Another word like "Homophobe" that has no objective meaning and is used to suppress dissenting views on certain issues.

It has a meaning. You know it does.
It hasn't been used to suppress any views.

The only suppressing that has happened has been you and certain other people trying to suppress people's right to comment on and criticise Ann's discrimination.


Whereas yours was full of profound insights.

Mine doesn't simply ignore the argument everyone else is making and pretend it doesn't exist. Yours does.

[Yaki da]

It has a meaning. You know it does.

It is a recently made up word that is used by those with a particular agenda to label their opponents rather than debate them.

It hasn't been used to suppress any views.

It is used to convince the easily led that people who disagree with certain viewpoints are suffering with an irrational fear or hatred and are therefore not even worth engaging with, and are there only to be diagnosed or insulted.


The only suppressing that has happened has been you and certain other people trying to suppress people's right to comment on and criticise Ann's discrimination.

You can keep calling her whatever you want. But some of us are going to correct you and point out that the language you are using is highly manipulative.


Mine doesn't simply ignore the argument everyone else is making and pretend it doesn't exist. Yours does.

Nobody is making any argument. They're just throwing around words like "Homophobia" and "Bigot" because they don't know how to make arguments.

[Marsh.]

You are incapable of comprehending what is being said and are fabricating illusions in your own mind.

Take it elsewhere.

[Yaki da]

You are incapable of comprehending what is being said and are fabricating illusions in your own mind.

:laugh:

I repeat... You don't know how to make arguments

[Jack_]

Yeah guys...'racist' is a recently made up word by those nasty snowflakes on Twitter, duh!

racist (n.)

1932 (as an adjective from 1938), from race (n.2) + -ist. Racism is in continual use from 1936 (from French racisme, 1935), originally in the context of Nazi theories. These words replaced earlier racialism (1882) and racialist (1910), both often used early 20c. in a British or South African context. There are isolated uses of racism from c. 1900.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/racist

Damn those social justice warriors and their new terminology!

[Yaki da]

Yeah guys...'racist' is a recently made up word by those nasty snowflakes on Twitter, duh!



https://www.etymonline.com/word/racist

Damn those social justice warriors and their new terminology!


Who mentioned twitter? And whilst I realise anything before the 1960s (or indeed anything before twitter) is ancient to some of you, 1932 is actually relatively recent. It had no objective meaning then. It had no objective meaning in the 60s when it was used against Enoch Powell (who nobody was ever able to define it to). And it has no objective meaning today. It, along with all the other "isms" and fake "phobias" of recent times is used exactly as I am pointing out the word "homophobia" is used.

[Maru]

Yeah guys...'racist' is a recently made up word by those nasty snowflakes on Twitter, duh!



https://www.etymonline.com/word/racist

Damn those social justice warriors and their new terminology!

I think they meant homophobe. Not sure why it being recent-ish has anything to do with anything... it's almost as old as Ann :laugh:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia
Origin of the term

Although sexual attitudes tracing back to Ancient Greece (8th to 6th centuries BC to the end of antiquity (ca. 600 AD)) have been termed homophobia by scholars, the term itself is relatively new,[11] and an intolerance towards homosexuality and homosexuals grew during the Middle Ages, especially by adherents of Islam and Christianity.[12]

Coined by George Weinberg, a psychologist, in the 1960s,[13] the term homophobia is a blend of (1) the word homosexual, itself a mix of neo-classical morphemes, and (2) phobia from the Greek φόβος, Phóbos, meaning "fear" or "morbid fear".[14][15][16] Weinberg is credited as the first person to have used the term in speech.[11] The word homophobia first appeared in print in an article written for the May 23, 1969, edition of the American pornographic magazine Screw, in which the word was used to refer to heterosexual men's fear that others might think they are gay.[11]

[Yaki da]

So it's a word that came out of the 1960s during the cultural revolution in America, and was no doubt created for subversive reasons. There was something called the long march through the institutions that went on in America after the 60s. That would not have been complete until the mid-90s. People coming out of universities today are the first to be fully immersed in this kind of language. It should come as no surprise that all of these fashionable left wing causes are accompanied by it.

[Maru]

Who mentioned twitter? And whilst I realise anything before the 1960s (or indeed anything before twitter) is ancient to some of you, 1932 is actually relatively recent. It had no objective meaning then. It had no objective meaning in the 60s when it was used against Enoch Powell (who nobody was ever able to define it to). And it has no objective meaning today. It, along with all the other "isms" and fake "phobias" of recent times is used exactly as I am pointing out the word "homophobia" is used.

So what should hatred towards homosexual people be? Homo-hatred? You have to remember, that it was taboo for a very long time to even talk about homosexuality in popular media, especially in the US, where everything is more censored/watered down than in the UK.

I remember when it came into heavy usage here in the 90's, and homophobia was a "softer", more PC word than bigotry/"hate". It was usually centered around conversations about behavior modification, i.e. don't be afraid or fearful of showing your homosexuality, etc...

The most common example in conversation was centered around how men were fearful of having their man-card challenged because they find other men attractive... it was meant to break the stigma of homosexuality being synonymous with sun and made it more acceptable in popular culture.

PC culture often runs both ways, especially in the US. Conservative/average folk don't like to be told off. So being called a homophobe meant you should open your mind a little bit more... it wasn't meant to make you into a bigot, but someone who needed their minds changed. At least back then.

[Marsh.]

:laugh:

I repeat... You don't know how to make arguments

No, love, you're IGNORING the perfect arguments laid out before you.

Just because you refuse to acknowledge them does not mean they don't exist so why you bother pretending you want to engage in discussion when you simply ignore what's being posted is beyond me. I'll leave you to continue pretending dozens upon dozens of posts don't exist whilst refusing to actually provide an argument yourself beyond "these words don't exist. Ann isn't frightened of gays lolz".

[Maru]

So it's a word that came out of the 1960s during the cultural revolution in America, and was no doubt created for subversive reasons. There was something called the long march through the institutions that went on in America after the 60s. That would not have been complete until the mid-90s. People coming out of universities today are the first to be fully immersed in this kind of language. It should come as no surprise that all of these fashionable left wing causes are accompanied by it.

Ok, so changing the definition of homophobe (etc), how would this change the perception of Ann's behavior by others? I'm not real sure what your point here is. I am an Ann supporter, but I do believe she is at least a supporter of a homophobic platform, at least as in how I would define homophobia...

Anyway, I posted my definition (http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9827248&postcount=353) here in this thread. No reason to re-write to keep it simple...

[Marsh.]

I don't get the hang up over the word "homophobe".

Remove that word from existence and you still have a woman who has discriminated hugely against a minority. That's still laid out for criticism and seen for what it is.

But then you'd get hung up on another word, and another word until the only one left for us to use is "Ann....." who's the PC brigade again? Who's stifling free speech again?

[Withano]

Its probably as close to an excuse as you can get, and I mean that sincerely.

Think of the things that are unacceptable today, if one of those things becomes acceptable by the time I'm her age, am I really gonna change my mind on it? Probs not.

[Tom4784]

Another word like "Homophobe" that has no objective meaning and is used to suppress dissenting views on certain issues.

This just shows a lack of respect for Freedom of Speech. People are allowed to be any 'ist' they want to be and others are allowed to call them out on it. By making out that opposing opinions are essentially 'suppressing' the original view, you are trying to devalue that opposing opinion to a point it's no longer considered valid. You are in fact trying to suppress views you disagree with.

If one word is enough to 'suppress' anyone's argument then that doesn't say a whole lot about the person or their opinion. It's not the fault of the accuser if the accused can't deal with an accusation because it's true.