View Full Version : Question for the LGBT community regard Mickey's time in the house?
Right so, off to a bad start with the homophobic comments, and the silly way in which he'd "turn someone straight" etc...But since then......
He's apologised for it, knew he did wrong, admitted it was clumsy (as he should). Whats more i think what he's done to actually PROVE he's genuinely remorseful is make an effort JoJo, and Danny in the house. They have forgave him, and welcomed him with open arms.
They had that playful joke when JoJo was in "disguise", he's had decent chats with Danny, who seems to be quite fond of Mickey. And just everything else really. He seems to get on better with JoJo and Danny than he does any of the HM's.
So my question is, if he's been forgiven by the very same people his comments were aimed it, and himself made an effort to get to know and understand Danny's drag queen stuff, how to address him and so on, and has genuinely been respectful since that early incident, would you forgive him?
I can't speak for the LGBT community, but i think he's done enough to not be branded a "homophobic nasty bigot" now.
I personally don’t think he’s a homophobe; but he did say homophobic stuff. I believe it’s from a place of ignorance more than anything.
If anything I think he’s probably more sexist than anything. The joke about turning a gay woman straight (through non consensual sex) was absolutely the words of a misogynist whose ego couldn’t hack a woman not wanting to sleep with him.
Jessica.
13-04-2025, 07:22 PM
Some would argue I'm not part of the lgbt community but I'll answer anyway - No, he's a very troubled man who is very unpredictable and I'm sure he'd call someone a slur in a flash again if they said the wrong thing to him. There are lots of stories about him doing unsavoury things throughout his life and he ended up getting ejected from the house so it's hard to see him as genuine.
Some would argue I'm not part of the lgbt community but I'll answer anyway - No, he's a very troubled man who is very unpredictable and I'm sure he'd call someone a slur in a flash again if they said the wrong thing to him. There are lots of stories about him doing unsavoury things throughout his life and he ended up getting ejected from the house so it's hard to see him as genuine.
But he wasn't ejected for anything homophobic, his temper has let him down. But from what we all know so far, his outburst wasn't homophobic related.
He might have had his troubles, but i feel after being around JoJo and Danny in the house, he seems to have a better understanding of what is right, and wrong to say concerning the LGBT community.
I dunno, so many calling him this massive evil homophobe X now, all things considered, is a bit harsh.
Jessica.
13-04-2025, 07:29 PM
But he wasn't ejected for anything homophobic, his temper has let him down. But from what we all know so far, his outburst wasn't homophobic related.
He might have had his troubles, but i feel after being around JoJo and Danny in the house, he seems to have a better understanding of what is right, and wrong to say concerning the LGBT community.
I dunno, so many calling him this massive evil homophobe X now, all things considered, is a bit harsh.
I'm saying I think he still is homophobic but if he isn't misogyny and intimidation are no better.
arista
13-04-2025, 07:32 PM
But he got on with Danny
Fine.
I'm saying I think he still is homophobic but if he isn't misogyny and intimidation are no better.
Do you not think JoJo's and Danny's warmth towards him is very telling though? I mean they live in there with him, we get to see 40 mins a day, theyre in there with him 24/7
Jessica.
13-04-2025, 07:36 PM
Have you all not heard the trope of how someone can't be racist because they have a black friend? Just because Mickey got on with two people from the community for a couple of days doesn't change anything at all.
Have you all not heard the trope of how someone can't be racist because they have a black friend? Just because Mickey got on with two people from the community for a couple of days doesn't change anything at all.
No no, of course that's a thing. Im just saying, if JoJo and Danny felt he was genuinely homophobic they wouldn't be so warm towards him in the house. Especially Danny, he seems to really like Mickey. And Danny doesn't suffer fools, that's obvious.
Benjamin
13-04-2025, 07:41 PM
I personally don’t think he’s homophobic, but he did keep repeating offensive (and homophobic) things.
Even when people tried to stop him. He was trying to be funny but in very bad taste.
JoJo had the right to be offended as it was offensive, but seems to have forgiven him, or at least moved on.
I don’t know much about him outside of this. He sounds like he’s lived a life where he hasn’t had to care or think too much about what he says (especially as he seems to not be very social) and I think he pushes boundaries without thinking of the consequences.Meaning the BB house probably isn’t the ideal place to be.
Crimson Dynamo
13-04-2025, 07:44 PM
Mickey was a great ally and will be sorely missed
Benjamin
13-04-2025, 07:46 PM
Mickey was a great ally and will be sorely missed
I wouldn’t call him an ally.
thesheriff443
13-04-2025, 07:46 PM
A gay person’s opinion means no more than a straight person’s opinion and vice versa
Not all gay people are nice people same for straight people
It’s easy to judge but a lot harder to be judged
Benjamin
13-04-2025, 07:48 PM
A gay person’s opinion means no more than a straight person’s opinion and vice versa
Not all gay people are nice people same for straight people
It’s easy to judge but a lot harder to be judged
The question was for us in the community and our views. Nobody is trying to “outdo” those not in the community with our opinion.
Liam-
13-04-2025, 07:56 PM
Yeah I don’t think he’s necessarily homophobic, he just seems to be very ignorant and careless of anybody else around him, I think the casualness of his aggression is the main problem, what with the whole ‘corrective rape’ vibe he had going on with Jojo and now his aggression and violent threats towards Chris, an incredibly flawed human being with bad tendencies but he doesn’t seem like a generally awful person
I personally don’t think he’s homophobic, but he did keep repeating offensive (and homophobic) things.
Even when people tried to stop him. He was trying to be funny but in very bad taste.
JoJo had the right to be offended as it was offensive, but seems to have forgiven him, or at least moved on.
I don’t know much about him outside of this. He sounds like he’s lived a life where he hasn’t had to care or think too much about what he says (especially as he seems to not be very social) and I think he pushes boundaries without thinking of the consequences.Meaning the BB house probably isn’t the ideal place to be.
I think that's fair and he's made a few comments about having a short fuse which he's worked on etc which suggests that even now we're seeing quite a tame version of Mickey
I think he has a lot of demons. He obviously felt that the best way to tackle those recently was to isolate himself but that comes with it's own issues, he's pretty out of touch with what's acceptable and what isn't
thesheriff443
13-04-2025, 07:57 PM
The question was for us in the community and our views. Nobody is trying to “outdo” those not in the community with our opinion.
True but at the end of the day all views are worth the same nothing
Mickeys words and actions got him removed
No one really cares, next week no one will be talking about good old Mickey
Yeah I don’t think he’s necessarily homophobic, he just seems to be very ignorant and careless of anybody else around him, I think the casualness of his aggression is the main problem, what with the whole ‘corrective rape’ vibe he had going on with Jojo and now his aggression and violent threats towards Chris, an incredibly flawed human being with bad tendencies but he doesn’t seem like a generally awful person
Do you think that JoJo's forgiveness, and his friendship with JoJo and Danny, as gay people, don't see Mickey as a threat?
I mean look at the clip, Danny and JoJo are trying to calm and help him. They seem quite fond of the guy.
I personally don’t think he’s a homophobe; but he did say homophobic stuff. I believe it’s from a place of ignorance more than anything.
If anything I think he’s probably more sexist than anything. The joke about turning a gay woman straight (through non consensual sex) was absolutely the words of a misogynist whose ego couldn’t hack a woman not wanting to sleep with him.
…yeah, I touched on that with you briefly in another thread…obviously his offensive and upsetting comments aimed at JoJo were homophobic …?…I think what got lost in it all quite a bit for me but what was very significant is that he specifically targeted a woman in a way that he hasn’t targeted any man in there …so I think he has a real struggle in relating to women possibly…unless it’s in a physical/sexual type way…hmmmm, I don’t think that he comes from a place of ignorance, though….i really to get the vibe that it’s more a place of misogyny….
…edited also to say that Mickey apparently did spend some time with Gareth Thomas/rugby player…he flew to Wales to talk to him about playing him in a movie/series, I’m not sure which…because he heard his story about coming out as gay in the rugby world…?…and he felt huge admiration for him and wanted to meet him and wanted to portray Gareth…
…I don’t think that he has the part, though…:laugh:…
Barry.
13-04-2025, 08:30 PM
It’s a hard one. He was born in a time LGBT was kind of looked down on. I think he’s not Homophobic but he’s a creep to women
It’s a hard one. He was born in a time LGBT was kind of looked down on. I think he’s not Homophobic but he’s a creep to women
He is, but just like 99% of men from his Hollywood era. Not excusing him, but still.
Glenn.
13-04-2025, 09:37 PM
He was homophobic and then got himself thrown out for being aggressive and threatening. He’s not someone I’d give any time to.
He was homophobic and then got himself thrown out for being aggressive and threatening. He’s not someone I’d give any time to.
He will be absolutely devastated
Jordan.
13-04-2025, 09:42 PM
He was homophobic and then got himself thrown out for being aggressive and threatening. He’s not someone I’d give any time to.
There's a reason he's spent the last 6 years of his life alone and probably will the rest of it.
He was homophobic and then got himself thrown out for being aggressive and threatening. He’s not someone I’d give any time to.
Glenn, you call women sweetheart and babe all the time, when they literally ask you not to?!
Crimson Dynamo
13-04-2025, 09:44 PM
Is there a dogging community
When do they get represented?
letmein
13-04-2025, 09:58 PM
The guy has obvious brain damage. He beat up his girlfriend. I don’t find him entertaining at all. It’s sad and exploitive. Do I think he’s homophobic? No idea, but what he said was awful. It wouldn’t be something I would personally throw him out of the house for but if he used a racial slur, he would have been thrown out, so, if we were to go by past unacceptable behavior, he deserved to get the boot for it. That being said, I view him as a tragic figure. He should never have been brought into the house begin with. The guy barely knows where he is and does nothing. It’s not funny and it’s not entertaining. It’s disgraceful on the show’s part. They knew what they were doing putting him in there. The ratings are still terrible so it really wasn’t worth it in the end.
Crimson Dynamo
13-04-2025, 10:02 PM
The guy has obvious brain damage. He beat up his girlfriend. I don’t find him entertaining at all. It’s sad and exploitive. Do I think he’s homophobic? No idea, but what he said was awful. It wouldn’t be something I would personally throw him out of the house for but if he used a racial slur, he would have been thrown out, so, if we were to go by past unacceptable behavior, he deserved to get the boot for it. That being said, I view him as a tragic figure. He should never have been brought into the house begin with. The guy barely knows where he is and does nothing. It’s not funny and it’s not entertaining. It’s disgraceful on the show’s part. They knew what they were doing putting him in there. The ratings are still terrible so it really wasn’t worth it in the end.
That is a real load of bigotry and conjecture. Wow
It's 2025 dude
Stop please
Jessica.
13-04-2025, 10:05 PM
The guy has obvious brain damage. He beat up his girlfriend. I don’t find him entertaining at all. It’s sad and exploitive. Do I think he’s homophobic? No idea, but what he said was awful. It wouldn’t be something I would personally throw him out of the house for but if he used a racial slur, he would have been thrown out, so, if we were to go by past unacceptable behavior, he deserved to get the boot for it. That being said, I view him as a tragic figure. He should never have been brought into the house begin with. The guy barely knows where he is and does nothing. It’s not funny and it’s not entertaining. It’s disgraceful on the show’s part. They knew what they were doing putting him in there. The ratings are still terrible so it really wasn’t worth it in the end.
Well said!
That is a real load of bigotry and conjecture. Wow
It's 2025 dude
Stop please
So much hatred for a guy with well known mental health issues. Love wins? Ok cool.
Jordan.
13-04-2025, 10:13 PM
So much hatred for a guy with well known mental health issues. Love wins? Ok cool.
Where was the hatred towards Mickey in that comment? It's a critique about people like yourself for viewing someone you know has mental health issues as your entertainment.
Where was the hatred towards Mickey in that comment? It's a critique about people like yourself for viewing someone you know has mental health issues as your entertainment.
More about the lack of empathy.
BIB. We're, and have always been guilty of that when it comes to shows like BB
Glenn.
13-04-2025, 10:20 PM
He will be absolutely devastated
You all are
Cherie
13-04-2025, 10:23 PM
Jo Jo volunteering to pack his bags, how will the community cope with this turn of events :fan:
She probably tied all his shoe laces together and mixed up all his medicine tablets
Quantum Boy
14-04-2025, 12:53 AM
The guy has obvious brain damage. He beat up his girlfriend. I don’t find him entertaining at all. It’s sad and exploitive. Do I think he’s homophobic? No idea, but what he said was awful. It wouldn’t be something I would personally throw him out of the house for but if he used a racial slur, he would have been thrown out, so, if we were to go by past unacceptable behavior, he deserved to get the boot for it. That being said, I view him as a tragic figure. He should never have been brought into the house begin with. The guy barely knows where he is and does nothing. It’s not funny and it’s not entertaining. It’s disgraceful on the show’s part. They knew what they were doing putting him in there. The ratings are still terrible so it really wasn’t worth it in the end.
He lost 99% of my sympathy when I found out he had clearly very plausible domestic violence charges against him (likely only dropped because his partner at the time didn't want to pursue them) and it was cemented by finding out he's pals with rancid old Johnny Depp. Birds of a feather, etc.
He was entertaining to watch in there for a few days but nothing about him is in any way likeable.
Kate!
14-04-2025, 02:43 AM
So much hatred for a guy with well known mental health issues. Love wins? Ok cool.
Yep! No empathy whatsoever. What a surprise.
So much hatred for a guy with well known mental health issues. Love wins? Ok cool.
Where was the hatred? At worst it was a post full of pity. The guy needs therapy but it’s a shame at 72 he’s only just figured that out.
People around him failed him really which is sad but he’s too old to still not be taking accountability for his own actions and it doesn’t mean everyone around him needs to excuse awful behaviour.
Yep! No empathy whatsoever. What a surprise.
“Straight, white man who says homophobic and sexually inappropriate stuff is deserving of empathy” says Reform supporter in most predictable opinion ever.
Benjamin
14-04-2025, 03:54 AM
Is there a dogging community
When do they get represented?
Why does it bother you so much somebody has posed a question to the LGBTQ+ community over a person who said homophobic comments, that you need make a quite frankly ridiculous post like that?
Kate!
14-04-2025, 04:15 AM
“Straight, white man who says homophobic and sexually inappropriate stuff is deserving of empathy” says Reform supporter in most predictable opinion ever.
Everyone is always worthy of empathy. It's.not the same as sympathy.
Everyone is always worthy of empathy. It's.not the same as sympathy.
The literal meaning of empathy is the understand or share the feeling of or have an affinity with a person. I don’t have that with someone who engages in homophobic and sexist remarks.
I have sympathy and pity for him because I think he should have gotten help a long time ago but that doesn’t mean I have to excuse a growing list of bad behaviour, especially at the age of 72.
Mystic Mock
14-04-2025, 05:19 AM
Is there a dogging community
When do they get represented?
:laugh:
Mystic Mock
14-04-2025, 05:23 AM
Why does it bother you so much somebody has posed a question to the LGBTQ+ community over a person who said homophobic comments, that you need make a quite frankly ridiculous post like that?
Tbf, he might've seen someone from the LGBTQ community become a Celtic fan back when he was a kid, and it's probably traumatized him.:laugh:
Why does it bother you so much somebody has posed a question to the LGBTQ+ community over a person who said homophobic comments, that you need make a quite frankly ridiculous post like that?
Dude’s a dinosaur. A big roar with tiny arms and hands.
Mystic Mock
14-04-2025, 05:56 AM
Dude’s a dinosaur. A big roar with tiny arms and hands.
:joker:
It's good to see you're back.
The literal meaning of empathy is the understand or share the feeling of or have an affinity with a person. I don’t have that with someone who engages in homophobic and sexist remarks.
I have sympathy and pity for him because I think he should have gotten help a long time ago but that doesn’t mean I have to excuse a growing list of bad behaviour, especially at the age of 72.
…even in the short time of knowing anything of him in the BB house…?..we’ve still seen with the age thing that he doesn't really consider any impact or upset of anything he says and so that ‘learning from’ just isn’t happening in that he upset and offended Ella so shortly after saying…yes, yes I understand etc when BB gave him the official warning post upsetting JoJo…
…with regards to empathy…?…I can understand that, that can wear a bit thin for some/many as well because empathy is also a two way thing and Mickey does speak words of ‘I never want to upset’ but then proceeds and continues to upset…and those people that he’s offending/upsetting…?…they also don’t live in a world of that moment in BB…they also have p life experiences and attachments etc that are equally deserving of empathy and understanding…and what can often happen in BB and similar reality…is that thoughts for others can get dismissed in focusing on one particular person …
…even in the short time of knowing anything of him in the BB house…?..we’ve still seen with the age thing that he doesn't really consider any impact or upset of anything he says and so that ‘learning from’ just isn’t happening in that he upset and offended Ella so shortly after saying…yes, yes I understand etc when BB gave him the official warning post upsetting JoJo
Precisely and I think we also need to consider the words he used and the things he said have never been okay. Being old and from another generation doesn't wash.
The word fag when referring to a gay person has always been an insult, and the only reason it used to be okay to say was because it used to be okay to insult gay people for being gay. The word hasn't changed and the intent behind it hasn't changed either.
It's not like the lingo has changed and he's having trouble remembering what's fine and what's not. He used insults, that have always been insults and the only difference between then and now was that saying homophobic stuff was okay and now it isn't.
And at 72 you don't get to play the old man card with that. He's not been cryogenically frozen for the last 20-30 years, he's been a living adult at the point of change.
I wasn't personally offended by anything he said, but I don't get offended easily, but I don't condone his words or behaviour either.
The issue is, instances like this on TV and in the media then leads to days worth of people defending someone using homophobic slurs and justifying it as "just a joke" or whatever, so it has a knock-on effect besides just the contestants in the show and it seems like a concerted push to normalise and mainstream that type of homophobia again. There are ways of being humorous and making jokes without using slurs but Mickey has a serious lack of self awareness and respect for others. Plus his sexual remarks towards JoJo and Ella were just gross.
Lostie!
14-04-2025, 01:38 PM
I'm not gonna label someone homophobic because of an off colour joke, I think his respectful relationship with Danny calls for more nuance to the discussion than that.
That said, JoJo's offense in the moment was entirely valid, she was the recipient and she's the only one who gets to say how she should feel. She and Mickey didn't have a long time, close friendship where that sort of banter may work, they were essentially strangers, I do think he meant it as an edgy joke but it didn't land and that's on him.
So yeah, I wouldn't call him homophobic. He seems like somebody who isn't often around loud and proud LGBT people like Danny and JoJo but he was clearly fond of Danny and I do feel like his relationship with JoJo was strengthening after their moment. I found it interesting, it made the show feel like an actual social experiment again.
The "I'll tie you up" part was the more problematic part for me, that crossed a whole other line.
Crimson Dynamo
14-04-2025, 01:39 PM
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2025/04/14/12/97256545-0-image-a-6_1744631023332.jpg
Why does it bother you so much somebody has posed a question to the LGBTQ+ community over a person who said homophobic comments, that you need make a quite frankly ridiculous post like that?
That user is the definition of a Karen. Always thinks they are putting the world to right but they are actually just cringe and out of touch. Most of their posts are like this :laugh:
Niamh.
14-04-2025, 01:46 PM
I wasn't personally offended by anything he said, but I don't get offended easily, but I don't condone his words or behaviour either.
The issue is, instances like this on TV and in the media then leads to days worth of people defending someone using homophobic slurs and justifying it as "just a joke" or whatever, so it has a knock-on effect besides just the contestants in the show and it seems like a concerted push to normalise and mainstream that type of homophobia again. There are ways of being humorous and making jokes without using slurs but Mickey has a serious lack of self awareness and respect for others. Plus his sexual remarks towards JoJo and Ella were just gross.
Yeah, all good points actually, imo saying stuff like he did which can offend people should be allowed in, I think it's much more beneficial to have them stay and have the HMs pull them up on it and let them all talk about it, that, imo is the best way to help people understand why it could be hurtful etc you may get through to the person and you may not but I can guarantee there's a better chance than just telling the person to shut up or kicking them out. I think that's what BB was all about in fact in the early days, different HMs, with different views and opinions, thrashing out their conflicting views and seeing things from other peoples perspectives.
**Of course this doesn't apply to threatening behaviour or bullying
I think he was deliberate in his wording of the things he said in the hope of being ejected.or at least nominated and evicted first.
To do that and not care about anyone's feelings but his own is really poor form.
Up until his departure though he was still by far the most interesting housemate and will be sorely missed.
Niamh.
14-04-2025, 01:59 PM
I think he was deliberate in his wording of the things he said in the hope of being ejected.or at least nominated and evicted first.
To do that and not care about anyone's feelings but his own is really poor form.
Up until his departure though he was still by far the most interesting housemate and will be sorely missed.
Would he still get paid (or paid his full fee) if he got ejected? Seems like something they'd have written into his contract so HM would follow the rules
Would he still get paid (or paid his full fee) if he got ejected? Seems like something they'd have written into his contract so HM would follow the rules
They probably all had different things written into their contracts. It's feasable that Mickey had paid at all costs one, considering his stature in the celeb world compared to the other hms.
Physicality wouldn't be one of them though. So it would be interesting to know why he was actually thrown out. Was it the language he used and the tears of Ellie. Or for squaring up to chris:shrug:
vesavius
14-04-2025, 03:06 PM
Remember 'You Decide'?
Short of actual physical violence that should always be the case, not removing HMs because 'members of the public may be offended'. Why bother voting when all you have on offer is an ideologically approved shortlist of who the production team and RedditX deems appropriate for mass consumption?
Vote between Daley, Jack, and Chris! Wo0o0o0h, interesting.
Someone is always offended. About everything. Every single interest group has an axe to grind. It never ends. You can't run an actually decent version of BB like that.
I watch BB for human behaviour, it's highs and lows, not for some enactment of a sanitised vision of some post Stalinist dystopia where everyone is grimace smiling and afraid to say anything while policing the HM next to them in case THEY say something that is worth social credit points.
Chris! Quickly say "you can't use that word" multiple times so that Reddit sees you and thinks you are one of them!"
Unless they are physically assaulting someone in any sense, leave them in and let the public decide.
Remember 'You Decide'?
Short of actual physical violence that should always be the case, not removing HMs because 'members of the public may be offended'. Why bother voting when all you have on offer is an ideologically approved shortlist of who the production team and RedditX deems appropriate for mass consumption?
Vote between Daley, Jack, and Chris! Wo0o0o0h, interesting.
Someone is always offended. About everything. Every single interest group has an axe to grind. It never ends. You can't run an actually decent version of BB like that.
I watch BB for human behaviour, it's highs and lows, not for some enactment of a sanitised vision of some post Stalinist dystopia where everyone is grimace smiling and afraid to say anything while policing the HM next to them in case THEY say something that is worth social credit points.
Chris! Quickly say "you can't use that word" multiple times so that Reddit sees you and thinks you are one of them!"
Unless they are physically assaulting someone in any sense, leave them in and let the public decide.
Genuine question, let's say on the civilian Big Brother there is an out and out homophobe, and throughout their stay they're just grossly homophobic. That person then goes on to win a lot of money for the homophobia, and it's voted for by the public, so you have a homophobe rewarded for homophobic behaviour by fellow homophobes and other people who think words don't matter.
Swap out homophobe for racist or sexist. Can you not see why such a result would be dangerous in giving people carte blanch to act in the same way.
I get what you're saying, and think the only think worth Mickey being removed for was the tie you up comment, but television can't be seen to be rewarding or promoting hateful rhetoric. It's puts real people in real danger.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 04:20 PM
Genuine question, let's say on the civilian Big Brother there is an out and out homophobe, and throughout their stay they're just grossly homophobic. That person then goes on to win a lot of money for the homophobia, and it's voted for by the public, so you have a homophobe rewarded for homophobic behaviour by fellow homophobes and other people who think words don't matter.
Swap out homophobe for racist or sexist. Can you not see why such a result would be dangerous in giving people carte blanch to act in the same way.
I get what you're saying, and think the only think worth Mickey being removed for was the tie you up comment, but television can't be seen to be rewarding or promoting hateful rhetoric. It's puts real people in real danger.
Well, as demonstrated one person's homophobia is another person's edgy joke, so... Who gets to decide? The most offended? That's just a race to the bottom.
But, do I see how it could be dangerous? No more than I can see the authoritarian suppression of action and speech under the jackboot of the 'we know what's good for you' new puritans to be dangerous.
People are already in real danger from that.
I am a firm believer of exposing bad ideas and actions to sunlight as a disinfectant, because they grow a lot worse in the darkness. I would 100% have a Mickey in there, for example, than a 'pick me' creeper like Chris. At least Mickey wears who he is openly and allows you to make a judgement on him based on that.
Question; Why are so called 'Liberals' the most authoritarian in every conversation these days?
Well, as demonstrated one person's homophobia is another person's edgy joke, so... Who gets to decide? The most offended? That's just a race to the bottom.
But, do I see how it could be dangerous? No more than I can see the authoritarian suppression of action and speech under the jackboot of the 'we know what's good for you' new puritans to be dangerous.
People are already in real danger from that.
I am a firm believer of exposing bad ideas and actions to sunlight, because they grow a lot worse in the darkness. I would 100% have a Mickey in there, for example, than a 'pick me' creeper like Chris. Atr least Mickey wears who he is openly and allows you to make a judgement on him based on that.
Question; Why are so called 'Liberals' the most authoritarian in every conversation these days?
I think intention is the biggest decider between what makes something a homophobic joke and what makes someone a homophobe, and I was referring to a hypothetical scenario of the second one.
I do agree with your option of exposing bad ideas and actions to sunlight, but not on the principle they could potentially be rewarded off the back of those bad ideas. More to the point, in the example I gave, why would anyone want to watch someone be and out and out homophobe. Grim.
I really am not an authoritarian, though I can understand that some on the extreme left do make it seem like liberals are that way inclined. Aside from being for small government, I am absolutely for free speech: people should be free to say whatever they feel and think. However, I think just because you're free to say something, it doesn't mean you're free to say something without consequence, rebuttal or objection and that is different in different settings. If you expose your free speech in a workplace and say that gays are immoral, like someone said earlier on this site, then don't cry about free speech when you get the sack.
Question: Why does your definition of authoritarian seem to start and end at people objecting to other people say hateful ****?
So much hatred for a guy with well known mental health issues. Love wins? Ok cool.
I missed this. LOL.
Not you critiquing others for not considering mental health issues when you outright called Ali fan's 'nutters' last year.
Real advocates for mental health issues don't call other people nutters so you can stop pretending.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 05:00 PM
I do agree with your option of exposing bad ideas and actions to sunlight, but not on the principle they could potentially be rewarded off the back of those bad ideas.
My wise old nan used to say that when someone says a thing everything before the 'but' should be disregarded.
If you expose your free speech in a workplace and say that gays are immoral, like someone said earlier on this site, then don't cry about free speech when you get the sack.
I agree, I would not cry about free speech if someone was voted out for their views, that's the game. I object to people being removed because they *might* offend someone. That's the whole point of my post in this thread.
You say you are not authoritarian, but you are arguing an extremely authoritarian position here so I am not sure how to reconcile that. Do I take you as what you show you are or what you say you are?
But, and it's not my view at all, why shouldn't someone have the view that being gay is immoral? I mean, more than half of British Muslims (52%) think homosexuality should not even be legal, let alone is moral, and nearly half (47%) think it is not appropriate for gay people to teach in schools, according to a survey of British Muslims, but no one on the Left ever comes at Islam for it. If Mickey had said that in the house he would be strung up... The outrage is so selective and fake.
Question: Why does your definition of authoritarian seem to start and end at people objecting to other people say hateful ****?
It doesn't, and if you honestly think that then you haven't been reading my words at all. It's a gross mischaracterization of every point that I have made and, frankly, you are better than that.
My wise old nan used to say that when someone says a thing everything before the 'but' should be disregarded.
It's called a nuanced POV. :shrug:
I agree, I would not cry about free speech if someone was voted out. I object to people being removed because they *might* offend someone. That's the whole point of my post in this thread.
You say you are not authoritarian, but you are arguing an extremely authoritarian position here so I am not sure how to reconcile that. Do I take you as what you show you are or what you say you are?
I don't think someone should be removed for maybe offending someone, I think people should be removed for threatening behaviour. You said it has to come to physical violence and I was making a point that in some cases, it wouldn't need to get to physical violence in the house to reflect physical violence outside.
I have said that Mickey shouldn't have been removed for his lesbian jokes. I said that is someone was hatefully homophobic then they shouldn't be rewarded for their views that actively hate on someone who is just existing as they were born.
But, and it's not my view at all, why shouldn't someone have the view that being gay is immoral?
I am not saying people shouldn't be allowed this view, I am saying they shouldn't expect it to go unchallenged.
Think about it like this: Religion hates me because I am me. I hate religion because they hate me. For religion to stop hating me, I would need to be someone else, born differently, live differently, act differently, lie. For me to stop hating religion, all they need to do is not hate me.
Would you say that it's wrong that homophobic abuse is considered a crime? Because I don't see how anyone can claim to support gay people yet let abuse of them go unpunished. Perhaps you will say words aren't abuse, but you are wrong because they are and moreover, they help inspire physical abuse, too.
Moreover, where does that kind of attitude end, all in the name of anti-authoritarianism? What about those against capitalism, those who believe everything should be shared amongst us all. Let's make theft legal, a truly free society.
I mean, more than half of British Muslims (52%) think homosexuality should not even be legal, let alone is moral, and nearly half (47%) think it is not appropriate for gay people to teach in schools, according to a survey of British Muslims, but no one on the Left ever comes at Islam for it. If Mickey had said that in the house he would be strung up... The outrage is so selective and fake.
Please stop lumping one whole political lean into the same group. It is my opinion religion is a choice (where being gay is not), and someone's choice to follow teachings who inspire hate should not have any bearing on my existence as a human. Someone else's beliefs should not negatively impact someone's right to live how they were born. I don't believe in God or Allah or any other prophet, but that doesn't mean I expect everyone to live by my own beliefs, or lack of. It doesn't mean I want to restrict their way of living. In the same way someone's diet shouldn't impact what I eat, someone else's religion shouldn't impact my life. When it does, that's when I have a problem.
It doesn't, and if you honestly think that then you haven't been reading my words at all. It's a gross mischaracterization of every point that I have made and, frankly, you are better than that.
Yes, ending a post with a mischaracterisation is annoying isn't it.
Where does the challenging of an opinion end though? In my experience it's usually pack mentality. One where the person with such an opinion is harassed and surrounded by people. People who are not challenging the opinion, but blatantly trying to shut down or silence that opinion.
Where does the challenging of an opinion end though? In my experience it's usually pack mentality. One where the person with such an opinion is harassed and surrounded by people. People who are not challenging the opinion, but blatantly trying to shut down or silence that opinion.
If we’re going to play extremes then let’s…
The end of challenging an opinion is the silencing of that opinion.
The end of letting that opinion go unchallenged is unchallenged physical attacks on a group of people who were simply born a certain way.
If we have to choose one or the other, I it’s not a tough choice.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 06:09 PM
You said it has to come to physical violence and I was making a point that in some cases, it wouldn't need to get to physical violence in the house to reflect physical violence outside.
If what you are saying is that darker behaviour has to be suppressed, controlled, and sanitised in the house so as to never reflect the darker side of being human ever again then what is this show even about now?
But, I have already covered this in my previous posts here so won't repeat it.
I have said that Mickey shouldn't have been removed for his lesbian jokes.
Can I be clear here please..? My OP was not about you. Plenty on RedditX said he should have been.. The overwhelming majority did in fact and it is those people I am talking about.
Would you say that it's wrong that homophobic abuse is considered a crime?
That depends on the type of abuse... Is calling someone who is gay a nasty slur 'abuse' enough to get arrested for? It shouldn't be, no. That shouldn't be any more illegal than calling a straight person a nasty slur. I hate the idea of protected identity groups in a Western liberal society.
Is physically abusing *anyone* worth considering a crime though? Of course.
Moreover, where does that kind of attitude end, all in the name of anti-authoritarianism? What about those against capitalism, those who believe everything should be shared amongst us all. Let's make theft legal, a truly free society.
Those people should be free to hold those ideas, no matter how bad they are.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 06:10 PM
Where does the challenging of an opinion end though? In my experience it's usually pack mentality. One where the person with such an opinion is harassed and surrounded by people. People who are not challenging the opinion, but blatantly trying to shut down or silence that opinion.
Faking offence or outrage in order to control and stamp on others is sadly all too common and abused.
Faking offence or outrage in order to control and stamp on others is sadly all too common and abused.
This ^
Those people should be free to hold those ideas, no matter how bad they are.
Yeah but if they robbed you you’d call the police.
And therein lies the point of difference between thinking those views and expressing those views in a way which inflicts harm upon another.
Protected identities exist for a reason, it’s so easy to disagree with it when the demographics you are part of haven’t had to deal with stuff others have. Next time a straight couple get attacked in the street for holding hands and being straight let me know.
Crimson Dynamo
14-04-2025, 06:21 PM
Yeah but if they robbed you you’d call the police.
.
they would not come
tell them someone called you a hurty name and yes they would come
vesavius
14-04-2025, 06:26 PM
Yeah but if they robbed you you’d call the police.
And therein lies the point of difference between thinking those views and expressing those views in a way which inflicts harm upon another.
Protected identities exist for a reason, it’s so easy to disagree with it when the demographics you are part of haven’t had to deal with stuff others have. Next time a straight couple get attacked in the street for holding hands and being straight let me know.
If there was no law against theft of personal property then there would probably be no law against holding some means of defending your property either, I would guess, which is basically the libertarian viewpoint. You wouldn't use the police because there would be no state police. I am not a libertarian though.
Anyhow, for this conversation it's too much of an extreme example to be useful really
Protected identities exist for a reason, it’s so easy to disagree with it when the demographics you are part of haven’t had to deal with stuff others have. Next time a straight couple get attacked in the street for holding hands and being straight let me know.
What demographic am I part of? I have never stated my orientation...
Well, as demonstrated one person's homophobia is another person's edgy joke, so... Who gets to decide? The most offended? That's just a race to the bottom.
But, do I see how it could be dangerous? No more than I can see the authoritarian suppression of action and speech under the jackboot of the 'we know what's good for you' new puritans to be dangerous.
People are already in real danger from that.
I am a firm believer of exposing bad ideas and actions to sunlight as a disinfectant, because they grow a lot worse in the darkness. I would 100% have a Mickey in there, for example, than a 'pick me' creeper like Chris. At least Mickey wears who he is openly and allows you to make a judgement on him based on that.
Question; Why are so called 'Liberals' the most authoritarian in every conversation these days?
It's ironic to me though that every time something like this happens we get the usual "can't say anything these days" spiel online, but the first instance of someone getting removed from Big Brother for offensive language happened almost twenty years ago. This is nothing new, so I'm not sure why people act like this is a consequence of some kind of new culture against freedom of speech. No one is taking away his right to say anything he wants, but he is in a television show where there is rules and regulations.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 06:30 PM
It's ironic to me though that every time something like this happens we get the usual "can't say anything these days" spiel online, but the first instance of someone getting removed from Big Brother for offensive language happened almost twenty years ago. This is nothing new, so I'm not sure why people act like this is a consequence of some kind of new culture against freedom of speech. No one is taking away his right to say anything he wants, but he is in a television show where there is rules and regulations.
Yes, this started seeping into the mainstream at least 20 years ago, I agree.
What demographic am I part of? I have never stated my orientation...
You once said something which implied you were straight, something about if I made a comment about your immutable characteristics it would be fine but if you made them about mine you’d be arrested.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 06:45 PM
You once said something which implied you were straight, something about if I made a comment about your immutable characteristics it would be fine but if you made them about mine you’d be arrested.
'immutable characteristics' covers a lot of ground, I guess.
Anyhow, let's respectfully agree to disagree at this point. I enjoy our exchanges, you are usually civil and reasonable in the things that you say, even if I don't agree, but I feel that we understand each other well enough at this point :)
'immutable characteristics' covers a lot of ground, I guess.
It does, but the discussion was about homosexuality and you made the differentiation between us, implying we were not the same.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 06:51 PM
It does, but the discussion was about homosexuality and you made the differentiation between us, implying we were not the same.
Ahh, maybe it was because I was vague about it that it easy to assume. I don't blame you.
I prefer being that when in these discussions because it usually stops people trying to pigeonhole me or assume my worldviews based on where I like to rub my junk. :laugh:
Yes, this started seeping into the mainstream at least 20 years ago, I agree.
What did? People being held accountable for being racist and homophobic? Is it your opinion that Emily should have been allowed to call her black housemates the N word?
vesavius
14-04-2025, 07:20 PM
What did? People being held accountable for being racist and homophobic? Is it your opinion that Emily should have been allowed to call her black housemates the N word?
Emily was unfairly removed, yes. There was no malice or hate in her use of it. Plus, she invented Indie and we should all respect that.
We probably have very different ideas of what 'properly accountable' for using words looks like.
But I mean the ideological push of the Frankfurt School in general... What grew to be understood these days as 'woke'.
Emily was unfairly removed, yes. There was no malice or hate in her use of it. Plus, she invented Indie and we should all respect that.
We probably have very different ideas of what 'properly accountable' for using words looks like.
But I mean the ideological push of the Frankfurt School in general... What grew to be understood these days as 'woke'.
That was disastrous .. Emily looked as though she was gonna be a brilliant housemate
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20250414/7cdb6045c4779e39d60309b7f07547f6.jpg
vesavius
14-04-2025, 07:35 PM
That was disastrous .. Emily looked as though she was gonna be a brilliant housemate
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20250414/7cdb6045c4779e39d60309b7f07547f6.jpg
She could been one of the greats! :dance:
Emily was unfairly removed, yes. There was no malice or hate in her use of it. Plus, she invented Indie and we should all respect that.
We probably have very different ideas of what 'properly accountable' for using words looks like.
But I mean the ideological push of the Frankfurt School in general... What grew to be understood these days as 'woke'.
Sorry but the fact that you think a white girl is entitled to go around calling black people the N word without consequence just nullifies your entire argument for me. That's a pretty extreme view to hold that you are masking as some kind of appreciation for free speech. The word "woke" has become so overused by the right at this point that it's essentially meaningless.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 07:54 PM
Sorry but the fact that you think a white girl is entitled to go around calling black people the N word without consequence just nullifies your entire argument for me. That's a pretty extreme view to hold that you are masking as some kind of appreciation for free speech. The word "woke" has become so overused by the right at this point that it's essentially meaningless.
lol it's not 'extreme'... stop being so dramatic :laugh::laugh:
I just think that intention and context matters in these things, and Emily was clearly not being racist. Charley didn't even care about it until Shabna convinced her that she should. A warning would have been fine.
If this position is 'extreme' to you then I am not sure what to say :laugh:
I agree that 'woke' is overused and often misused, but I understand what it means and use it correctly, if sparingly. :hee:
lol it's not 'extreme'... stop being so dramatic :laugh::laugh:
I just think that intention and context matters in these things, and Emily was clearly not being racist. Charley didn't even care about it until Shabna convinced her that she should. A warning would have been fine.
If this position is 'extreme' to you then I am not sure what to say :laugh:
I agree that 'woke' is overused and often misused, but I understand what it means and use it correctly, if sparingly. :hee:
I'm sorry to be the one to inform you, but supporting a white person's right to call a black person the N word is most certainly an extreme racist view, there's no two ways around it. I would also say that's pretty universally acknowledged as a textbook example of racism. There's no context in which a white person calling a black person that word isn't racist, and no amount of mental gymnastics around "intention" will change that. She knew the word she was using and she knew that she was calling a black person that word, she said it with the intention she meant it.
"Emily was clearly not being racist" I have to laugh :joker:
Glenn.
14-04-2025, 08:53 PM
Are people still trying to defend racism
vesavius
14-04-2025, 08:54 PM
I'm sorry to be the one to inform you, but supporting a white person's right to call a black person the N word is most certainly an extreme racist view, there's no two ways around it. I would also say that's pretty universally acknowledged as a textbook example of racism. There's no context in which a white person calling a black person that word isn't racist, and no amount of mental gymnastics around "intention" will change that. She knew the word she was using and she knew that she was calling a black person that word, she said it with the intention she meant it.
"Emily was clearly not being racist" I have to laugh :joker:
Luckily I care not even a little for your (bad) take on that or your judgement of me for it :shrug:
You don't get to define or dictate how others think. Sorry.
If you want to see racism everywhere and tilt at windmills, knock yourself out. I don't mind.
Glenn.
14-04-2025, 08:58 PM
I’d say you’ve defined your view on it quite clearly and I’m sorry to tell you, it’s racist.
vesavius
14-04-2025, 09:00 PM
I’d say you’ve defined your view on it quite clearly and I’m sorry to tell you, it’s racist.
Well, there's a credible viewpoint I can trust :joker::joker:
Glenn.
14-04-2025, 09:08 PM
I would. I’m clearly not the only one who thinks it.
Conzors
14-04-2025, 09:20 PM
I wouldn’t say homophobic but definitely ignorant
vesavius
14-04-2025, 09:23 PM
I would. I’m clearly not the only one who thinks it.
Two people having a bad take doesn't make it a good take.
You have no power here :joker:
Anyhow, done with you. Moving on. Have a great night Glenn!
Mystic Mock
15-04-2025, 03:34 AM
Remember 'You Decide'?
Short of actual physical violence that should always be the case, not removing HMs because 'members of the public may be offended'. Why bother voting when all you have on offer is an ideologically approved shortlist of who the production team and RedditX deems appropriate for mass consumption?
Vote between Daley, Jack, and Chris! Wo0o0o0h, interesting.
Someone is always offended. About everything. Every single interest group has an axe to grind. It never ends. You can't run an actually decent version of BB like that.
I watch BB for human behaviour, it's highs and lows, not for some enactment of a sanitised vision of some post Stalinist dystopia where everyone is grimace smiling and afraid to say anything while policing the HM next to them in case THEY say something that is worth social credit points.
Chris! Quickly say "you can't use that word" multiple times so that Reddit sees you and thinks you are one of them!"
Unless they are physically assaulting someone in any sense, leave them in and let the public decide.
I agree with this tbh.
Mystic Mock
15-04-2025, 03:48 AM
I think intention is the biggest decider between what makes something a homophobic joke and what makes someone a homophobe, and I was referring to a hypothetical scenario of the second one.
I do agree with your option of exposing bad ideas and actions to sunlight, but not on the principle they could potentially be rewarded off the back of those bad ideas. More to the point, in the example I gave, why would anyone want to watch someone be and out and out homophobe. Grim.
I really am not an authoritarian, though I can understand that some on the extreme left do make it seem like liberals are that way inclined. Aside from being for small government, I am absolutely for free speech: people should be free to say whatever they feel and think. However, I think just because you're free to say something, it doesn't mean you're free to say something without consequence, rebuttal or objection and that is different in different settings. If you expose your free speech in a workplace and say that gays are immoral, like someone said earlier on this site, then don't cry about free speech when you get the sack.
Question: Why does your definition of authoritarian seem to start and end at people objecting to other people say hateful ****?
Then you're not for freedom of speech then imo.
The only time freedom of speech should go out the window is if the person is either threatening or harassing someone, everything else should be allowed imo.
Admittedly Mickey would be removed under my metric for threatening both Jojo and Chris in different scenarios.
Mystic Mock
15-04-2025, 04:09 AM
I'm sorry to be the one to inform you, but supporting a white person's right to call a black person the N word is most certainly an extreme racist view, there's no two ways around it. I would also say that's pretty universally acknowledged as a textbook example of racism. There's no context in which a white person calling a black person that word isn't racist, and no amount of mental gymnastics around "intention" will change that. She knew the word she was using and she knew that she was calling a black person that word, she said it with the intention she meant it.
"Emily was clearly not being racist" I have to laugh :joker:
But weren't the public going to vote Emily out that week anyway?
Why didn't BB just let the public finish the job that they'd already started?
Then you're not for freedom of speech then imo.
That’s fine for you to think, but your definition of freedom of speech isn’t THE definition of freedom of speech which absolutely puts restrictions on certain scenarios such as hate speech, which will come with consequences if broken.
Mystic Mock
15-04-2025, 06:29 AM
That’s fine for you to think, but your definition of freedom of speech isn’t THE definition of freedom of speech which absolutely puts restrictions on certain scenarios such as hate speech, which will come with consequences if broken.
Oh I know that the laws in this country will arrest/punish people for being dickheads, but imo being a dickhead in and of itself shouldn't see people removed off a Show like BB imo, and that's just away from anything Mickey's done because tbf he was pushing his luck.
Countries around the world claim that they need more Prison space, yet the law enforcement will arrest people for offensive comments, thus making even less Prison space.:facepalm:
I do respect you as a member so I do apologize if my previous post came across a bit OTT or rude, I just don't like people's speech being censored.
Because with someone like Mickey for example, I knew as soon as he said that he wanted to "tie Jojo up" that he was extremely unlikely to be someone that would be my favourite on Big Brother.
And that imo is the beauty of Big Brother, and the Internet nowadays as people will be more honest about their opinions, and you know if you like the person or not afterwards.
Where as tbf with this CBB lot some of them might have fantastic personalities irl, but they're being inhibited by production and a chunk of the public because their lives could be potentially ruined.
And in my view it's a slippery slope, because yes you're okay with censoring speech when it comes to people's prejudices, but it never stops there, history has taught us that.
I'm sorry for the long rant btw, freedom of speech is something that I am passionate about, as I didn't like it when Carol Vorderman got fired from the BBC over tweets either.
Oh I know that the laws in this country will arrest/punish people for being dickheads, but imo being a dickhead in and of itself shouldn't see people removed off a Show like BB imo, and that's just away from anything Mickey's done because tbf he was pushing his luck.
Countries around the world claim that they need more Prison space, yet the law enforcement will arrest people for offensive comments, thus making even less Prison space.:facepalm:
-
And in my view it's a slippery slope, because yes you're okay with censoring speech when it comes to people's prejudices, but it never stops there, history has taught us that.
I'm sorry for the long rant btw, freedom of speech is something that I am passionate about, as I didn't like it when Carol Vorderman got fired from the BBC over tweets either.
You can diminish hate speech to "being a dickhead" if you wish, but that doesn't diminish the actions words do have. People do, will and always have acted upon the words of people, take a look at history. The people spreading negative messages about women are usually not actually assaulting them themselves physically, but their words illicit a response in incels to so do. The influential people spreading anti-LGBT rhetoric aren't beating up a gay couple who are just enjoying a drink outside a pub, but they inspire others to do so, not through orders, but simply by helping stir the pot of simmering homophobia already present.
You simply cannot put your head in the sand and act like the effect of words end at the moment they leave the tongue, that they're "just words" and "offence is taken and not given". It's not about that. It's about the impact the words have on others who want a reason to think it's justifiable to punch a gay man in the face.
LGBT people are four times more likely to be a victim of assault than straight people and compared to five years ago there is a 56% increase in hate crime against LGBT people.
But yeah, the real issue is the slippery slope that starts with telling people if they say discriminatory words they will be reprImanded.
(Suffice to say, none of this is now referring to what Mickey said by any stretch, the conversation has moved far beyond Mickey onto a much larger subject at hand)
vesavius
15-04-2025, 06:05 PM
'Hate speech' is such a nebulous non defined term... It just means whatever the person wielding it wants it to mean.
Such a dangerous weapon in the hands of the more deranged. Not saying that's you at all BBX, but for every moderate that would use it wisely there are 100 that would use malicously it to suppress control and bludgeon others with that simply disagree with them.
That aside, the people beating up gay people at this point in the UK's history are not doing it because they watched a spicey episode of CBB.
....and compared to five years ago there is a 56% increase in hate crime against LGBT people.
I don't think the Left are at all ready yet to talk about why that actually is.
Jessica.
15-04-2025, 06:10 PM
Anyway everyone who said that Danny and Jojo forgave him so he must be a nice person are wrong because Danny was so relieved when he left and Jojo didn't pine over him either.
vesavius
15-04-2025, 06:13 PM
Anyway everyone who said that Danny and Jojo forgave him so he must be a nice person are wrong
On my part, that's a relief, because I personally never said that. I have said that JoJo has made her peace with mickey and if she has then I am happy to move on, but that's not the same thing.
I didn't actually see anyone else say that either, but if you say you did, ok.
I don't think the Left are at all ready yet to talk about why that actually is.
I'm all quite genuinely all ears (my father was an elephant), but please provide statistics and evidence to back up the claims.
vesavius
15-04-2025, 06:28 PM
I'm all quite genuinely all ears (my father was an elephant), but please provide statistics and evidence to back up the claims.
I have already provided some in this thread, but you ignored them.
I am not gonna do the work of digging around for more for them to be ignored again or, more likely, to be dismissed because they don't come from a hard left source or whatever. I have had these sealioning type discussions far too many times and know how it goes.
Like I say, you aren't ready for that particular conversation yet I don't think. Give it another 5-10 years and you will be.
Crimson Dynamo
15-04-2025, 06:31 PM
A rise in hate crimes = a rise in allowing silly idiots to WEAPONISE "hate crimes" as a means to shut people down.
The only hate that has been on the rise is from the far left and activists
still, at least we don't have any of them on here
vesavius
15-04-2025, 06:36 PM
A rise in hate crimes = a rise in allowing silly idiots to WEAPONISE "hate crimes" as a means to shut people down.
The ridiculously wide broadening of what can be felt to be a 'hate crime' is definitely a big part of it, yes.
I mean, make more things a crime and don't be amazed when crime rises.
I have already provided some in this thread, but you ignored them.
I am not gonna do the work of digging around for more for them to be ignored again or, more likely, to be dismissed because they don't come from a hard left source or whatever. I have had these sealioning type discussions far too many times and know how it goes.
Like I say, you aren't ready for that particular conversation yet I don't think. Give it another 10 years and you will be.
You provided stats on the attitudes of British Muslims, which I didn't ignore and went on to inform you of my opinion around religion and my distain for their hatred of my sexuality. :conf:
I asked for stats that the 56% rise in LGBT hate crimes are because of British Muslims which is what you were inferring.
I don't like the values Islam promotes, and have never pretended to, but I'm also not going to pretend they are responsibility of the rise in hate crimes without evidence. :shrug:
vesavius
15-04-2025, 06:47 PM
I asked for stats that the 56% rise in LGBT hate crimes are because of British Muslims which is what you were inferring.
The problem for LGBT+ is not predominantly even from British Muslims.
But, how can you acknowledge that over 50% of UK Muslims (these are not the recent immigrants that come from far more fundamentalist cultures, btw) don't even think homosexuality should be legal and not make a connection?
TBC, I am not attacking moderate Muslims here, I am friends with many and they express a wide range of rational and reasonable views. This is not about them.
The problem for LGBT+ is not predominantly even from British Muslims.
But, how can you acknowledge that over 50% of UK Muslims (these are not the recent immigrants, btw) don't even think homosexuality should be legal and not make a connection?
I'm not not making the connection I'm just not ready to blame them solely for the rise in hate crime without evidence, that is all.
Aside from that, even if it was, what is your point? It doesn't discredit what I have been saying.
vesavius
15-04-2025, 06:57 PM
Aside from that, even if it was, what is your point? It doesn't discredit what I have been saying.
The point that was being made is that people are not watching a spicey episode of CBB and then going out and bashing gays because of it.
The recent spike in hate crime and violence figures you quote are coming from far deeper ideological and cultural beliefs than that.
Its odd that muslims are opposed to homosexuality or LGBT yet are quite happy to groom/ abuse our uk white girls and don’t even regard them as human ..just something to use and abuse .
Even the young men will date / sh*g our white girls but then marry a good asian girl ..
The recent spike in hate crime and violence figures you quote are coming from far deeper ideological and cultural beliefs than that.
I know this, which is why I said in an earlier post.
(Suffice to say, none of this is now referring to what Mickey said by any stretch, the conversation has moved far beyond Mickey onto a much larger subject at hand).
Luckily I care not even a little for your (bad) take on that or your judgement of me for it :shrug:
You don't get to define or dictate how others think. Sorry.
If you want to see racism everywhere and tilt at windmills, knock yourself out. I don't mind.
I don't see racism everywhere, but do I see it when a white person calls a black person the most offensive racial slur in existence? Yes, absolutely. You would have to be either incredibly dumb or incredibly ignorant not to.
I'm not attempting to dictate how you think, if you are happy being a racist that is entirely your decision, but that doesn't make you exempt from being challenged on your views and having your (extremely weak) logic questioned.
vesavius
15-04-2025, 07:31 PM
if you are happy being a racist that is entirely your decision.
oh, go away with your silly name calling. I'm done with you.
Smoothbrained trolls that try to win by just screaching 'racist' at the other person. This is why I don't trust the Left to define what 'Hate Speech' is... There are just too many psychos that will try and abuse it.
oh, go away with your silly name calling. I'm done with you.
Person who defends white people calling black people the N word recoils in horror at being told they are a racist
:joker:
I'm all quite genuinely all ears (my father was an elephant), but please provide statistics and evidence to back up the claims.
Was he dumbo?
Was he dumbo?
That’s a good one, nice work. :laugh:
Mystic Mock
15-04-2025, 10:44 PM
You can diminish hate speech to "being a dickhead" if you wish, but that doesn't diminish the actions words do have. People do, will and always have acted upon the words of people, take a look at history. The people spreading negative messages about women are usually not actually assaulting them themselves physically, but their words illicit a response in incels to so do. The influential people spreading anti-LGBT rhetoric aren't beating up a gay couple who are just enjoying a drink outside a pub, but they inspire others to do so, not through orders, but simply by helping stir the pot of simmering homophobia already present.
You simply cannot put your head in the sand and act like the effect of words end at the moment they leave the tongue, that they're "just words" and "offence is taken and not given". It's not about that. It's about the impact the words have on others who want a reason to think it's justifiable to punch a gay man in the face.
LGBT people are four times more likely to be a victim of assault than straight people and compared to five years ago there is a 56% increase in hate crime against LGBT people.
But yeah, the real issue is the slippery slope that starts with telling people if they say discriminatory words they will be reprImanded.
(Suffice to say, none of this is now referring to what Mickey said by any stretch, the conversation has moved far beyond Mickey onto a much larger subject at hand)
I understand what you're saying, but I'm just going to use the same point that I use when people try to blame GTA for an increase in violence.
If someone (for example) wants to beat someone to death because they're gay, then unfortunately they were on the brink of committing the crime anyway, no Andrew Tate Podcast saying Homophobic stuff can alter his viewers mindsets.
Tbh, if someone is a fan of Andrew Tate unironically it probably already means that the individual was messed up to begin with, the same with any other political extremist on the right.
And I too am concerned about the worrying increase in violence against gay people as well, but I honestly think that silencing people from what they really think, otherwise their life is ruined will send them more down an extremist path than just debating it out with them why their opinion is wrong.
Because challenging these extremists views is extremely important (and also is apart of free speech,) but challenging them in the mainstream is better than letting them build their own echo chambers, where most people don't even see these lunatics coming.
Mystic Mock
15-04-2025, 10:48 PM
On my part, that's a relief, because I personally never said that. I have said that JoJo has made her peace with mickey and if she has then I am happy to move on, but that's not the same thing.
I didn't actually see anyone else say that either, but if you say you did, ok.
Tbf there were people that I saw saying that Danny was now friends with Mickey.
Mystic Mock
15-04-2025, 10:53 PM
A rise in hate crimes = a rise in allowing silly idiots to WEAPONISE "hate crimes" as a means to shut people down.
The only hate that has been on the rise is from the far left and activists
still, at least we don't have any of them on here
I don't know about that tbh.
I think both sides have gotten more extreme over the last 5-10 years.
I feel Politically not represented anymore because both sides in general have moved past what I deem as more moderate/sensible Political views.
vesavius
15-04-2025, 11:18 PM
Tbf there were people that I saw saying that Danny was now friends with Mickey.
I accept that for sure, I def don't see every post.
Mystic Mock
15-04-2025, 11:20 PM
I accept that for sure, I def don't see every post.
Oh same here tbf.
Even during off-season there can be stuff that's being said and I have no clue what people are going on about.:joker:
Then you're not for freedom of speech then imo.
The only time freedom of speech should go out the window is if the person is either threatening or harassing someone, everything else should be allowed imo.
Admittedly Mickey would be removed under my metric for threatening both Jojo and Chris in different scenarios.
Freedom of speech doesn't go out the window per say, but it's still obviously possible to violate any laws that have nothing to do with the regulation of speech. A person may be calling someone an n-word while murdering the **** out of them. They won't be arrested for the use of that word, they're being arrested for the murdering part and all words can do is aid motive or add to enhancements. (Ex: Hate crime)
However, limiting free speech with speech laws that have the ability to regulate it means there is no freedom of speech. That's a pretty low bar here, but a fairly important one that most would agree that that right is no longer accessible to all of society. Govt can erode away more speech with additional legislation citing important social regulations that "need doing" so it would be trivial to scrap it with further protections.
We keep an iron fist on ours because self-censorship is considered anathema to a free society. It's also seen that advocates and politicians that want to mandate speech are only ever interested in doing so to suppress actual criticism, usually of them and their agenda.
I understand it is dated to question certain lifestyle choices and that words can be very hurtful, but get in line. We have all suffered due to the behavior of other humans throughout human history. Humans suffer daily due to bad governing and the one thing we do all have all in common is human suffering. The only thing limiting speech does is tip the scales so that one person's suffering outweighs another. Many people can't wrap their mind around this because they think too short term and don't really question giving the govt increasing precedent to erode speech protections.
Speech should always be on the table to keep free flow of ideas, even if its purpose is just the continued demise of bad ideas. We can still talk about the "glories" of slavery and general degeneracy in a debate form. However, being able to even have a have debate is critical to free thought. Also, having that debate doesn't make 1) that person a heathen 2) will suddenly cause slavery to make a miraculous return... a few people may have positive words to say about a certain idea, but the point is that the pushback is very real in that that people can't generally question the unpopularity of ideas as they don't have an external voice directing the public on what it should and should not say.
What some don't know, the primary reason America still has 2A is to be able to forcibly protect our freedoms and inherent rights. It's not for vanity. Yes, it would be nice to live in a world where we could trust the people in power implicitly with certain duties but that's not the reality of the world. So if anything, freedom of speech is just a more peaceful way we can through the force of political friction regulate our own govt and its powers.
Btw, a person can catch an aggravated assault charge by just threatening bodily harm in the US, but it's not the words or content that justify the charge, it's because they expressed intent. Ex: "I'm going to shoot you" is intent. Though in the case of a gun, it would be raised to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
Mickey could've caught an assault charge in the US if it was justifiable enough he was intending to cause bodily injury to another person. His fists are considered weapons with the potential to cause fatal injury and so the indictment could even be raised with a dangerous weapon charge.
Also, if it's not clear, I support the inclusion of hate crime laws, but believe hate speech is cancerous to free speech protections.
I understand what you're saying, but I'm just going to use the same point that I use when people try to blame GTA for an increase in violence.
If someone (for example) wants to beat someone to death because they're gay, then unfortunately they were on the brink of committing the crime anyway, no Andrew Tate Podcast saying Homophobic stuff can alter his viewers mindsets.
Tbh, if someone is a fan of Andrew Tate unironically it probably already means that the individual was messed up to begin with, the same with any other political extremist on the right.
Thanks for your reply. I totally get your point, but in another thread you openly question why that game promoting rape even exists and why the makers haven’t been investigated. So you can understand that there is a difference between a game in which the ability to do bad stuff exists (GTA) and a game which actively promotes doing bad stuff (the other game) and why one is not problematic in the way the other is. So there are complexities and levels which exist in society across all things where we say “that crosses the line”, and that has always existed.
To clarify, if someone was to say “I don’t agree with gay marriage, to be honest, I think marriage should be between a man and a woman” then I’m not calling for them to be punished for having that opinion. I disagree with it, but whatever.
If someone says “Gay people are disgusting, they’re after our children and their gross behaviour is disintegrating traditional values and it must be stopped”, well that’s another kind of thing altogether and that kind of all-too-common baiting by far-right paranoid Lawrence Fox type people should absolutely be challenged and called out for what it is: inciting hate.
thesheriff443
16-04-2025, 06:30 AM
Long gone are the days bb5 when Jason called Dan a big **** and it was taken as it was ment a joke
I be not seen all these attacks on the gay community only teenagers stabbing others teenagers to death
I be not seen all these attacks on the gay community only teenagers stabbing others teenagers to death
Compiled the below in just 2 minutes, hope that helps. Multiple issues can exist at the same time.
Drag Queen Story Hour UK founder attacked in ‘homophobic hate crime’ just hours after proposing - link (https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/05/22/drag-queen-story-hour-founder-attacked/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Thugs wanted for vile homophobic hate crime after assaulting gay couple with plank of wood in Chadwell Heath, east London - link (https://www.nationalworld.com/news/police-appeal-for-witnesses-after-homophobic-hate-crime-in-london-4380972?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Police release images of man after couple attacked in London Underground hate crime - link (https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/01/07/london-underground-bank-homophobic-attack/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Woman attacks man with glass bottle in suspected homophobic hate crime - link (https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/10/31/woman-attacks-man-with-glass-bottle-in-suspected-homophobic-hate-crime-hackney/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Man sentenced for homophobic assault on Drag Race UK star - link (https://www.cps.gov.uk/mersey-cheshire/news/man-sentenced-homophobic-assault-drag-race-uk-star)
Couple beaten up in homophobic attack in Birmingham's Gay Village speak of ordeal - link (https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/couple-beaten-up-homophobic-attack-21332064?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Nottingham: Man 'shaken and scared by homophobic attack' - link (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-67943891?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Gay man beaten by youths in homophobic attack in Bournemouth - link (https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/23373066.gay-man-beaten-youths-homophobic-attack-bournemouth/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Clapham stabbing: Man sought after homophobic attack - link (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66515319?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
vesavius
16-04-2025, 01:18 PM
If someone says “Gay people are disgusting, they’re after our children and their gross behaviour is disintegrating traditional values and it must be stopped”... should absolutely be challenged and called out for what it is: inciting hate.
You are 100% correct. It should be called out and challenged. And if it was said on CBB it of course would be. Robustly and at great length.
It could easily be argued that the conversation coming from a person saying those things and the mass rejection of that as an idea is actually a really valuable teaching point that would reach way beyond the show itself.
But, I maintain... No one not already ideologically or culturally predisposed is watching a spicey episode of CBB and then going out to bash gays because it convinced them that was the OK thing to do.
But, I guess we will get a Netflix show about how a 13 year old white British lad from a stable loving traditional family was radicalised by Mickey Rourke to go on a giant gay bashing spree.
Also, I have also seen even on this forum straights being called 'gross' and 'dirty breeders' and that seems to be perfectly acceptable by the majority of the 'progressive' mindset. I didn't see any on the Left here calling for them to be banned from the forum.
But, I maintain... No one not already ideologically or culturally predisposed is watching a spicey episode of CBB and then going out to bash gays because it convinced them that was the OK thing to do.
I think it's been clear for a while now this conversation is not longer about Mickey Rouke.
Also, I have also seen even on this forum straights being called 'gross' and 'dirty breeders' and that seems to be perfectly acceptable by the majority of the 'progressive' mindset. I didn't see any on the Left here calling for them to be banned from the forum.
I don't recall seeing those posts or responding positively to them. That's bad too...?
vesavius
16-04-2025, 01:47 PM
I think it's been clear for a while now this conversation is not longer about Mickey Rouke.
The conversation is about what we want it to be about and I am choosing to use Mickey as an example.
I don't recall seeing those posts or responding positively to them. That's bad too...?
I didn't say anyone responded positively to them. I said they were not called out and those that said it were not called to be banned from the forum. I wasn't talking specifically about you.
I am disappointed though that you missed me saying, "You are 100% correct. It should be called out and challenged. And if it was said on CBB it of course would be. Robustly and at great length. It could easily be argued that the conversation coming from a person saying those things and the mass rejection of that as an idea is actually a really valuable teaching point that would reach way beyond the show itself."
The conversation is about what we want it to be about and I am choosing to use Mickey as an example.
Okay? :laugh: Well I'm done talking about Mickey so I am choosing to opt out of this conversation.
I didn't say anyone responded positively to them. I said they were not called out and those that said it were not called to be banned from the forum. I wasn't talking specifically about you.
Okay.
vesavius
16-04-2025, 01:58 PM
Okay? :laugh: Well I'm done talking about Mickey so I am choosing to opt out of this conversation.
OK, let's not talk about CBB on a forum about CBB. Makes sense. :shrug:
I feel that you are using that as an excuse to swerve the points actually being made, but you do you ofc.
Mystic Mock
17-04-2025, 12:13 AM
Thanks for your reply. I totally get your point, but in another thread you openly question why that game promoting rape even exists and why the makers haven’t been investigated. So you can understand that there is a difference between a game in which the ability to do bad stuff exists (GTA) and a game which actively promotes doing bad stuff (the other game) and why one is not problematic in the way the other is. So there are complexities and levels which exist in society across all things where we say “that crosses the line”, and that has always existed.
To clarify, if someone was to say “I don’t agree with gay marriage, to be honest, I think marriage should be between a man and a woman” then I’m not calling for them to be punished for having that opinion. I disagree with it, but whatever.
If someone says “Gay people are disgusting, they’re after our children and their gross behaviour is disintegrating traditional values and it must be stopped”, well that’s another kind of thing altogether and that kind of all-too-common baiting by far-right paranoid Lawrence Fox type people should absolutely be challenged and called out for what it is: inciting hate.
I do 100% agree with you on this actually.
Because that kind of language is definitely inciting the weirdos in our society to act out their violent urges against a community that they don't like.
Basically I am with you on incitement.
Mystic Mock
17-04-2025, 12:16 AM
Compiled the below in just 2 minutes, hope that helps. Multiple issues can exist at the same time.
Drag Queen Story Hour UK founder attacked in ‘homophobic hate crime’ just hours after proposing - link (https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/05/22/drag-queen-story-hour-founder-attacked/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Thugs wanted for vile homophobic hate crime after assaulting gay couple with plank of wood in Chadwell Heath, east London - link (https://www.nationalworld.com/news/police-appeal-for-witnesses-after-homophobic-hate-crime-in-london-4380972?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Police release images of man after couple attacked in London Underground hate crime - link (https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/01/07/london-underground-bank-homophobic-attack/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Woman attacks man with glass bottle in suspected homophobic hate crime - link (https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/10/31/woman-attacks-man-with-glass-bottle-in-suspected-homophobic-hate-crime-hackney/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Man sentenced for homophobic assault on Drag Race UK star - link (https://www.cps.gov.uk/mersey-cheshire/news/man-sentenced-homophobic-assault-drag-race-uk-star)
Couple beaten up in homophobic attack in Birmingham's Gay Village speak of ordeal - link (https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/couple-beaten-up-homophobic-attack-21332064?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Nottingham: Man 'shaken and scared by homophobic attack' - link (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-67943891?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Gay man beaten by youths in homophobic attack in Bournemouth - link (https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/23373066.gay-man-beaten-youths-homophobic-attack-bournemouth/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Clapham stabbing: Man sought after homophobic attack - link (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66515319?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
That's awful.
I honestly can't believe that it has happened in Bournemouth too, I thought that they were a fairly liberal area.
I do 100% agree with you on this actually.
Because that kind of language is definitely inciting the weirdos in our society to act out their violent urges against a community that they don't like.
Basically I am with you on incitement.
:) It's also important to remember that it's not necessary to literally call for action to embolden people to take physical measures.
All humans need is the idea something is a threat to them, their loved ones, their way of life, and many will act accordingly. And LGBT have been framed as a threat throughout their existence.
- We've been framed as a threat to traditional family values (so did not have the same legal rights within relationships)
- We've been framed as a threat to public health (so could not give blood up until 2021 if we were sexually active - to the point where myself, in a 12-year monogamous relationship could not give blood but my friend who was straight and sleeping with a new girl every weekend could)
- We've been framed as a threat to the sanctity of marriage.
- We've been framed as a threat to children. (Lawrence Fox recently stated that the plus in LGBT+ was a symbol for pedophiles. It wasn't a direct call for action, but it was definitely posing LGBT people as a threat to peoples children.)
People don't need anyone to say "gays are gross, get 'em" they just need to imply gays are a threat, unfounded and without evidence or data. That's enough. Which is why not challenging or persecuting certain levels of hate speech is so dangerous.
I'm not talking about Mickey's 'I'm voting off the lesbian' or jokes made my comedians on stage. Context and intent matter hugely and no, nobody is going to watch Big Brother and see Mickey call JoJo a fag and then go and punch a lesbian, but there is a need for a certain level of 'freedom' allowed before people are reprimanded for what they say. It's the same with everything in society.
Mystic Mock
17-04-2025, 07:47 AM
:) It's also important to remember that it's not necessary to literally call for action to embolden people to take physical measures.
All humans need is the idea something is a threat to them, their loved ones, their way of life, and many will act accordingly. And LGBT have been framed as a threat throughout their existence.
- We've been framed as a threat to traditional family values (so did not have the same legal rights within relationships)
- We've been framed as a threat to public health (so could not give blood up until 2021 if we were sexually active - to the point where myself, in a 12-year monogamous relationship could not give blood but my friend who was straight and sleeping with a new girl every weekend could)
- We've been framed as a threat to the sanctity of marriage.
- We've been framed as a threat to children. (Lawrence Fox recently stated that the plus in LGBT+ was a symbol for pedophiles. It wasn't a direct call for action, but it was definitely posing LGBT people as a threat to peoples children.)
People don't need anyone to say "gays are gross, get 'em" they just need to imply gays are a threat, unfounded and without evidence or data. That's enough. Which is why not challenging or persecuting certain levels of hate speech is so dangerous.
I'm not talking about Mickey's 'I'm voting off the lesbian' or jokes made my comedians on stage. Context and intent matter hugely and no, nobody is going to watch Big Brother and see Mickey call JoJo a fag and then go and punch a lesbian, but there is a need for a certain level of 'freedom' allowed before people are reprimanded for what they say. It's the same with everything in society.
Fair points tbf, and I can agree with most of it.
And just to go to Lawrence Fox for a minute, how anybody agrees with anything that this dude says is probably the biggest mystery in Politics at the moment.
The guy makes Trump and Andrew Tate seem reasonable imo, and that takes some doing.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.