This isn't a hill to die on, TS.

The poor old bigot getting called names that she'll never see :(

I don't get how people become so hateful like her tbh.

Because there's people who'll defend her views, who hold in part similar views who'll distance themselves from her comments but defend her anytime she makes them.

The media who give her the platform, know there's people who she will please immensely with her as you say hateful comments and prejudices.

Because that's where it comes from the hate in her to anyone she considers undesirables.

I for one, and I'm sure from what you say too, you may agree.
I'd never in any way even set out to give veiled defence of her, or excuse her for these comments because she's old fashioned.
She's not old fashioned.
She's a hate filled homophobe and one of the worst kinds of religious bigots.
Not warranting, praise or defence from any quarter in my opinion.

Just because people see things differently doesn't mean they are a fan.

The LGBTQ community fought long and hard against offensive references, stereotyping and slurs so its disappointing to see those tools that were used against them for so long used by some to make a point.

:clap1: :clap1:

well said, and i apologize for some names i had given to Ann


and yes i give in, Ann is entitled of her own opinion, and tbh it isn't surprising this coming from her, if she is really religious

that said, Ann and other people like her should try to not pay attention to the same-sex couple then, and focus on others, i mean older generations for sure will like Bill Bailey, Caroline Quentin more

Doesn't mean they aren't either.

Well I wouldn't want to do anything else but to condemn her views.
Unless I agreed with some of what she was saying.

Thankfully I'd choose to be as far distanced from her hate filled bigotry.
The furthest away I could get.
IF I didn't agree with her.

Never giving any even tiny veiled defence of her and bypass the undercurrent of her hateful prejudices.

The fact they had to fight so hard to gain that and rights..
Doesn't mean they now have to shut up and not defend still those rights hard fought for.
Especially against the hate filled religious bigots like Widdecombe.

Or would you rather those kinds of bigots prosper and get their say?

I certainly wouldn't and I'd be distancing myself and her vile suggestions of life and prejudices every chance I got to.

she is like this, because of being super religious, those views i mean


a reason more why i do not like her, is because she is just being miserable the whole time

+ she had to slaughter my fave celine song my heart will go on with her ''rumba'' :yuk: also not over that horror moment

Who is saying they can't defend themselves, point it out on the thread please where anyone has said that

Honestly I think people are deliberately misrepresenting what Cherie (and TS) have said, it isn't about Ann or defending her and saying she shouldn't be called out for being a bigot ........because she is, what she said is offensive and divisive. The issue is the use of sexist(and ageist) insults which are insulting to women in general, it's not ok to use racist or homophobic insults against people just because they're assholes so why doesn't the same apply about sexist slurs? It's about the use of sexist words in general as a way to insult anyone.

********I AM NOT DEFENDING ANN OR ANY OF HER VIEWS

Oh give over

Thank you Niamh, a level of intelligence and critical thinking applied is always welcome :hee:

True Niamh


being sexist, ageist isn't good either



btw something about Ann here (source wikipedia)

Religious views
Widdecombe became an Anglican in her 30s, after a period of being an agnostic following her departure from religious schooling. Widdecombe is now a practising Roman Catholic; she converted in 1993 after leaving the Church of England. Her reasons for leaving the latter were many, as she explained to reporters from the New Statesman:

I left the Church of England because there was a huge bundle of straw. The ordination of women was the last straw, but it was only one of many. For years I had been disillusioned by the Church of England's compromising on everything. The Catholic Church doesn't care if something is unpopular.
In October 2006, she pledged to boycott British Airways for suspending a worker who refused to hide her cross. The matter was resolved when the company reversed the suspension.

In 2010, Widdecombe turned down the offer to be Britain's next ambassador to the Holy See, being prevented from accepting by suffering a detached retina. She was made a Dame of the Order of St. Gregory the Great by Pope Benedict XVI for services to politics and public life on 31 January 2013.


this does show she is very devoted to her religion, so yeah i apologize for calling her attention seeking and a troll in this thread, because i do now believe these are really her views, opinions (maybe outdated which is why i obviously disagree with them) but people like Ann are still allowed to have those views, and we have a right to disagree with them either (but i agree sexist, ageist insults are a no go for anyone)

Cherie, I'm not going to risk being in bother again debating with you, sorry.
I've said what I've said and people interpret things differently especially the written word.

Which I will myself always never defend homophobic bigotry from anyone man or woman.
Nor will I have or show respect to to someone like Widdecombe who'll use any chance she gets to spout her vile dangerous bigotry.
Religious bigotry at that.

If I call her an awful woman it's because she is sadly a woman.
I can't call her a man hardly.

She doesn't care, man or woman who she offends.
That seems okay here then.

I detest Widdecombe always have.
She's one of the worst examples of a human being there can be in my view
Because if she had her way, LGBT individuals would likely be burned at the stake or stoned.

I'll stand by my own views.
Let's just leave it that you and I don't agree so it's pointless me saying anything else.

I know loads of people devoted to their religion who are nothing like Widdecombe.
She stands for the whole opposite of Christianity.
Anyone claiming to be a real Christian should equally be offended by her representation of it as they ought to be of her hateful thoughts and words.

you claimed people were defending her when nothing of the sort was happening, if you are going to make these claims you have to back them up, engage with me, don't engage with me that is your perogative

Shocked to see Niamh defending Ann and her views.

Exactly. I really struggle to follow some of the logic people have posted.

Cherie saying resorting to slurs / offensive insults to other groups of people is not the best way to go about things = not understanding the point or being homophobic According to some??

It’s the exact same logic as saying I am against animal cruelty and so that means I disagree with trans rights... (Aka no logic between the two points at all)

There is LITERALLY no logic in some posters posts in here, they have tried to put words into cheries mouth :joker: (and when called out merely state they are just posting or it’s a different battle... well no, if you’re posting nonsense expect to be called out is my view)

No I don't.
Plus I've answered you by saying clearly I stand by what I've said.
That's in relation to what I've read and seen.

It is my right to engage or not to with anyone on here and that's what I will do too, thank you for reminding me.

It's good protection to do so.

x2 :fist:

More false equivalence.

'Yeah, this bigot may have done everything in her power to harm LGBT people but LGBT people are just as bad for calling her names when she continues to be bigoted!'

Utter bull****.

Never once did Cherie say people are just as bad... nor did she make that point

Once again the point Cherie made was LGBT have undergone decades of having slurs thrown at them and being called offensive words on the basis of being gay. And that those people especially would understand that generalising a whole population with slurs gets you nowhere/ is ridiculous...

Saying she is old and irrelevant / going to die soon and other slurs for being old isn’t helping the cause.. if anything it’s harming the cause as people will (wrongly may I add) read your comments and think how childish and go the other way

there are other ways to argue your point other than insulting large communities, hopefully you can learn from this

:joker::joker::joker:

Yeah, I’m not going to lose sleep over someone who would be quite happy to see all of my rights stripped away, because of the gender I’m attracted to, being called some nasty names, it’s time to normalise minorities not having to tolerate bigotry because ‘everyone is allowed an opinion’, we’re expected to just be nice and grateful we don’t get put in prison anymore

also lol, when Ann is in the minority here, since a lot of people look forward to seeing Nicola & Katya

and it is the second time she aims for Katya, after that one time she wanted her and Seann banned from the show after that kiss

Indeed, you and Niamh got what I meant right on the nail...thank you

what is the correct way of debating then?

cuz i'm pretty much confused now either


i understand sexist, ageist and other slurs are wrong, but what is the correct way then?

Pretty much, the constant false equivalence annoys me endlessly. Insulting someone isn't akin to trying to impede and strip people of their rights.

I'm not gonna clutch my pearls over a bigot getting dragged.

Still false equivalence, nothing that other person has said changes that.

What do you mean by false equivalence though? Do you mean women in general haven't suffered as bad as gay people in the past? (and present depending on where you live) or are you talking specifically about Ann Widdecomb?

It's the whole trying to make the LGBT look hypocritical for lashing out at bigots when those bigots have repressed us. People clutching their pearls being all like 'We shouldn't call her names', whether they realise it or not, are engaging in false equivalence by saying we're being just as bad when it's not comparable at all.

She has done everything she can to impede and hurt LGBT people, we are entitled to our anger.

She should definitely be called names I think and bigot is a very fitting one. I just take exception at sexist insults, no matter what the situation because it's hurtful for women in general I believe (w***e, slut etc are my personal least favourites). I'm in no way saying people shouldn't be angry with her and call her out on remarks like this.

So if the the gay community are angered by a black person holding bigoted views they can legitimately employ racist language as a way of conveying anger? That’s what is being said I believe or is it only sexist and ageist comments that can be utilsed which makes the point even more biazarre than it already is

Yeah that's what I'm saying, sexism just seems to be not as frowned upon as others when in reality women through history have had as ****ty a time as other oppressed groups

Agree with you, I will join Nicky in the confused corner...is it a tiered system maybe :laugh: