ChatterBank1 min ago
Is Melanie Phillips onto something...or is she misguided?
Melanie Phillips is pretty awesome. As Mark Thomas says:
"I am constantly impressed by Melanie Phillips’ ability to type and wave a pitchfork and flaming torch at the same time."
But are there serious concerns sitting behind her furrowed brow? Is there a gay agenda which seeks to "destroy the very concept of normal sexual behaviour"
http://www.thefirstpo...mail-outrages-twitter
http://www.melaniephi...rticles-new/?m=201101
Or is she just a mental right whinger who's 'preaching to the converted'?
"I am constantly impressed by Melanie Phillips’ ability to type and wave a pitchfork and flaming torch at the same time."
But are there serious concerns sitting behind her furrowed brow? Is there a gay agenda which seeks to "destroy the very concept of normal sexual behaviour"
http://www.thefirstpo...mail-outrages-twitter
http://www.melaniephi...rticles-new/?m=201101
Or is she just a mental right whinger who's 'preaching to the converted'?
Answers
We've been here before, doc.........
What you describe is not simply 'homosexual behaviour'..
You had two essentially paedophile teachers whose focus was boys.....
What you describe is not simply 'homosexual behaviour'..
You had two essentially paedophile teachers whose focus was boys.....
09:58 Thu 03rd Feb 2011
The trouble with Phillips and the kind of people who have written comments supporting her in the first link above is that, like most right-wingers, they only have to see a few examples of something that goes against their beliefs in order to claim that it's "taking over" or "destroying our identity" or "corrupting our children". If you analyse what she and her supporters have said, there really isn't anything for them to get in such a lather about.
As an overt gay-hater, she of course seeks out any example of what could be remotely construed as pro-gay, then bleats about it as being evidence of the "gay conspiracy" (oh how that made me laugh).
She is very at home at the Mail as she, like it, is almost completely motivated entirely by hatred. She is a very sorry individual. She strikes me as being on a different part of the same spectrum of obsessive hatred as Hitler.
As an overt gay-hater, she of course seeks out any example of what could be remotely construed as pro-gay, then bleats about it as being evidence of the "gay conspiracy" (oh how that made me laugh).
She is very at home at the Mail as she, like it, is almost completely motivated entirely by hatred. She is a very sorry individual. She strikes me as being on a different part of the same spectrum of obsessive hatred as Hitler.
sp1814, you've twice posed the question as, is she right or just mad. No she's not right but I don't think she's necessarily mad or mental. She has a very strong prejudice that she talks about a lot and seems to be filled with anger and hatred. I find it very sad to see people who appear so motivated by such vitriolic hatred.
Iv'e listened to her frequently on the ' Moral Maze ' on Radio 4 .
This is the first time i've seen a picture of her - isn't it strange how the face is not what you had in your minds eye ?
Any way ( and this might be controversial ) she looks like a lesbian herself - whatever a lesbian looks like .
Shall I get me coat ?
This is the first time i've seen a picture of her - isn't it strange how the face is not what you had in your minds eye ?
Any way ( and this might be controversial ) she looks like a lesbian herself - whatever a lesbian looks like .
Shall I get me coat ?
Goodness! What's this, a witch hunt by those lovely people who in other circumstances would be saying 'live and let live'? Oh but of course. Expressing opinions that oppose the liberal left is the one thing that isn't acceptable. Only mad people and Nazis do that don't they. Tut! How very dare they! Whatever next?! Well, dare I say it? //Go on Naomi - say it and be damned!// OK, I will. I actually think she has raised some very valid issues.
Backdrifter, may I suggest you read what you've written and think about it? Where vitriolic hatred is concerned, you appear to be a bit of an expert.
Backdrifter, may I suggest you read what you've written and think about it? Where vitriolic hatred is concerned, you appear to be a bit of an expert.
She has had a long journey, from liberal left to libertarian right. She is a polemicist, and her rhetoric suggests she is entirely convinced of the validity of her own views, often in the face of all the evidence.For myself, I think much of her views are coloured by the fact that she is jewish and overtly religious, and I think especially when it comes to her writings on Islam and the middle east, she filters all of her views and commentary through this filter. Any critic of Israels policies over illegal settlements or treatments of the palestinians is dismissed as being anti - jewish.
I cannot take her seriously.
She has variously claimed that Barack Obama is a marxist. That the MMR vaccine is dangerous - more dangerous than the diseases it helps prevent. That Bush and Blair were right to invade Iraq,that Hussain had Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the fact that none have ever been found is because they were all moved to Syria.She claims that evolution is "only a theory" and that "Intelligent Design" is a valid science that better describes the development of species.She supports military action against Iraq. She thinks the Church of England is antisemitic.
I can certainly understand why her critics would label her "Mad Mel"............
I cannot take her seriously.
She has variously claimed that Barack Obama is a marxist. That the MMR vaccine is dangerous - more dangerous than the diseases it helps prevent. That Bush and Blair were right to invade Iraq,that Hussain had Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the fact that none have ever been found is because they were all moved to Syria.She claims that evolution is "only a theory" and that "Intelligent Design" is a valid science that better describes the development of species.She supports military action against Iraq. She thinks the Church of England is antisemitic.
I can certainly understand why her critics would label her "Mad Mel"............
Not very impressed with your first link sp - that's hardly balanced reporting.
I think Naomi has a point - clearly the concept of irony is lost on Backdrifter.
In her article she states "To oppose the gay rights agenda no more means that one is anti-gay than to oppose multicuturalism or extreme feminism means one is anti-black or anti-woman" - that is absolutely a fair point.
The problem is that as soon as anybody criticises anything gay, the default setting of many people is to wail 'homophobia' where no such 'obia' exists.
I think Naomi has a point - clearly the concept of irony is lost on Backdrifter.
In her article she states "To oppose the gay rights agenda no more means that one is anti-gay than to oppose multicuturalism or extreme feminism means one is anti-black or anti-woman" - that is absolutely a fair point.
The problem is that as soon as anybody criticises anything gay, the default setting of many people is to wail 'homophobia' where no such 'obia' exists.
That's because gay rights issues normally revolve around them wanting no more rights than straight people and the likes of Melanie Phillips resisting.
For example I don't recall anyone suggesting that the gay age of consent should be lower than the straight age of consent.
The anti-gay agenda is to maintain such a position to reinforce their view that gay people are a lesser form of humanity to be tolerated only due to the largesse of mainstream society.
When gay people are asking for more rights than straight people she may have a point but whilst they are still fighting court battles just to be allowed to stay in bed and breakfasts together she does not
For example I don't recall anyone suggesting that the gay age of consent should be lower than the straight age of consent.
The anti-gay agenda is to maintain such a position to reinforce their view that gay people are a lesser form of humanity to be tolerated only due to the largesse of mainstream society.
When gay people are asking for more rights than straight people she may have a point but whilst they are still fighting court battles just to be allowed to stay in bed and breakfasts together she does not
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
..............and I'm not 'specially fussy !! :o)
Melanie Phillips has (I suppose) the right to say things as she sees them. I find her comments to be misguided, at best, and inflammatory, at worst.
I don't profess to be privvy to every agenda in the world but I doubt that there is any such thing as a 'gay agenda'...........unless all she is referring to is the call for complete parity and equality between homo- and hetrosexual lives.........?
Melanie Phillips has (I suppose) the right to say things as she sees them. I find her comments to be misguided, at best, and inflammatory, at worst.
I don't profess to be privvy to every agenda in the world but I doubt that there is any such thing as a 'gay agenda'...........unless all she is referring to is the call for complete parity and equality between homo- and hetrosexual lives.........?
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
News4 mins ago
Are The West In The Grip Of The Woke...
News15 mins ago
Crosswords19 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.