Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

I haven't suggested there is an "underground network" as if this is an organised conspiracy, but simply that there are number of influential people who all hold similar opinions and without even the *need* for someone to say "wouldn't it be a good idea if...?" there is an effort to, as you say, "make life as hard as possible for gays".

Verb sap.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

I'd say this "number of influential people" could be considered an underground network after all, they're not going to publically declare their 'dislike' of gays are they?

Graham can neg-rep whoever he wants - that's why we have it as a feature on the site.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Oh so If thats the point I can just keep neg repping whoever I wont hmm thanks Russ

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

What's wrong with that question?




Nonsense, there are many hetrosexual PCs who wear earings while off shift.
They too are affected by this, therefore either this action is not targetted at gays, or you are suggesting that the police believe any man wearing an earing is gay.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Well....yes, that's why we have it. All we ask is that any comments you apply to rep points are not abusive.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

No, of course not, but I re-iterate that "underground network" suggests some sort of organised conspiracy, instead of just a group of powerful, like-minded people.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

I was extracting the unrine Russ. I dont do neg points anyway. I have + repped a few but thats it. I think the neg repping is childish myself but hey I've seen his posts so nuff said really ;)

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Again, I'd say that anyone who can make such a change to 'oppress' (my choice of word) gays in such an institution as a police force surely can be likened to an organised conspiracy?

Anyway we're going around in circles here with definitions of words, the bottom (pardon the pun) line is that I cannot see that this is a deliberate act to make life hard for gays. After all, being gay isn't just about wearing an earing while on duty is it? (Or have I been reading the wrong books???)

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

As someone has remarked earlier, isn't this stereotyping gay people?

If a policeman wears an earring he must be gay? Is that right?

So which is it?

Gay (or any other people) shouldn't be stereotyped?
Gay (or any other people) shouldn't be discriminated against?

I would say both. But, as there are many people, there are many opinions. Not being gay myself, I'd say some gay people may view the topic at hand as discrimination, others may view it as stereotyping.

As another person remarked earlier. If you advocate gay rights (which I'm all for) pick your battles right. I don't think this is a good pick. But that's my opinion.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

:erm: :shocked: :no: :spin: :wtf: :Yikes: :shrug: :eeek:

Excuse the large number of emoticons there, but I *CANNOT* believe that you just asked me that!!

"Are you still beating your wife" is the *CLASSIC* "loaded question" because *however* you answer it, you're going to end up in the wrong and the *only* way to answer it is *not* answer it at all!

If you answer yes, then you admit beating your wife.

If you answer no, then because of the way it's worded "are you still...?" the obvious corollary is that you may no longer be beating your wife, but you *admit* to having beaten her in the past...!!!

No they are not because, by your own statement, it is only *off shift*!

Well, yes! I think the suggestion that some senior members of the Police consider that any man wearing an earring is gay is a valid one!

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

If you want to liken it to that, I can't stop you.

Is being a Sikh Police Officer "just" about wearing a turban on duty?

No, of course not, but it's a part of it...

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Actually that's not quite correct. If you asked me that, my answer would be no because

a) I don't have a wife, and

b) I've never hit a woman.

Graham...a Sikh has to wear a turban, it's an essential part of their faith.

A homosexual male does not HAVE to wear an earing.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

As I've said, I think there may well be some in the senior ranks of the Police who *do* stereotype gays in this way.

It is not *MY* stereotyping, however.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Substitute girlfriend or other such referant as appropriate.

Which is, as I pointed out, the only way to deal with the question, ie *not* answer it.

No, a Sikh does not *have* to wear a turban. Their religion may *require* them to wear one, but that's not the same thing.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

No, my answer would be "I've never hit her".