Serious question about Daily Mail readers and gays...

[sp1814]

And this is IN NO WAY a rant at Daily Mail readers, but a genuine question.

Have a look at this link about Neil Patrick Harris and his partner. They've done some (what I would call) genuinely beautiful shots for out.com:

http://www.dailymail....nce-open-romance.html

Now...spool down to the comments section and sort the comments check out what gets a positive rating and what gets a negative rating.

My question is simple - what do Daily Mail readers of this story have a problem with? I mean - almost exclusively, anyone who has written something nice or positive gets 'red arrowed'.

Is it homophobia or something more complex?

[sp1814]

naomi24

The reason I referred to the 'minefield of a wedding album' is because you said you wrote:

"I don't appreciate anyone - male or female - gay or straight - flaunting their sexuality."

Now, with the obvious exception of the bedroom shot, the others look very much like the kind of thing you'd see in a wedding album. So the question stands - if you saw a wedding album, and were confronted with shots of the bride and groom thusly, would you hurl it upon the fire, screaming "DEMONS".

Sorry - just made myself laugh thinking about that image.

I can totally understand what you mean when you say that they're being hypocritical (about being poster boys), although I don't really agree with your conclusion - but I don't get the 'flaunting their sexuality' thing...

[maggiebee]

Am I the only old fart on this site who doesn't have a scooby about who these people are? Nice looking chaps but they should keep their private lives just that....... private.

[Davethedog]

Maggie Neil Patrick Harris, is quite a big star in the states, hes in a show called "how I met your mother" which is on more 4 (I think).

Hes a celebrity, so by nature a show off as are all celebs it appears to me, no doubt "Out" magazine do other spreads but the Mail couldn't get a full head of steam about Mr & Mr John Smith of Okipinokie , Arkansas.

[naomi24]

SP, why on earth would I throw pictures on the fire screaming 'Demons!'? This is the second time on this thread that you've made quite ridiculous, and actually, quite insulting assumptions about your mistaken perception of my attitude towards gay people. You're making it up as you go along. That's a pretty big chip you have on your shoulder.

If you can understand why I say these people are hypocrites, then you'll understand why the pictures are fundamental to that hypocrisy. I think backdrifter summed it up.

[sp1814]

naomi24

I thought it would've been pretty obvious that was just a joke...you know - to lighten the atmosphere.

I'm going to put the question to you one last time and if I don't get a staight (ho ho ho) answer, I'll give up

You wrote:

"I don't appreciate anyone - male or female - gay or straight - flaunting their sexuality."

Would the same pictures in a wedding album between a man and a woman (forget the bedroom shot - which is pretty innocuous) raise the same feelings in you?

And please don't think that I'm attacking you in any way. I don't understand your viewpoint, and would love to hear your though process.

[naomi24]

I still can't see your correlation between a wedding album and these pictures but I'll bear with you. No, wedding pictures do not flaunt sexuality - whether the pair be gay or heterosexual. These pictures, however, do because they are specifically designed to court publicity - and publicity that the people involved specifically claim they don't want - which is why I think they're hypocrites. Is that straight enough?

[Ankou]

i am sure they 'do' want the publicitiy what with being celebrity actor types.

it is "picture perfect poster boys" they don't want to be perceived as, ref my very 1st post.

[nungate]

Confession. I read the Mail. Only place to find Fred Basset. Some of the editorials and so forth I find too much to take, and I tend to ignore most of the stuff anyway, way to far to the right for me. My point? Well there are no pics about these guys in my Mail today, the pics are nicely photographed (ooh there's that "nice" word) I know who Neal Patrick Harris is and do not give two hoots as to his (or anyone else's) sexual orientation - saving my own. You take love where you find it.

[birdie1971]

@Sp1814 - “...I thought it [hating homosexuals and wishing they were dead] would've been pretty obvious that was just a joke...you know - to lighten the atmosphere...”

Like you, I've always thought that falsely accusing someone of something quite objectionable is a wonderful way to lighten an atmosphere. Particularly when there's no indication – implicit or explicit – that you're attempting to be humorous.

I'm sure she got the joke and laughed her socks off at your exquisite wit. Nice one!

[sp1814]

I give up. The point is - these two chaps are not flaunting their sexuality in the same way that similar photos in a wedding album can't be considered 'flaunting sexuality'.

I am disappointed that this very simple concept cannot be grasped...but hey no - diff'rent strokes and all that.

Oh and birdie1971 - I accept your point...problem with writing in forums is that tone/sarcasm comes across completely differently from the spoken word. Will choose my 'jokes' more carefully in future.

[sp1814]

naomi24

I think I've got a better example. Forget EVERYTHING about wedding albums.

If the couple in the photo were Brad and Angelina, and the article made reference to them not wanting to be put on an alter - would you say they were flaunting their sexuality?

You wouldn't would you?

Unless they were naked.

[naomi24]

SP, so you've banged on about wedding albums, asked for a straight answer, and now you have one you don't like around the houses we go again. Look, anyone who purposefully seeks publicity and allows personal photographs to be released to the media but then says they don't want those pictures to attract the sort of attention they're likely to attract is a hypocrite - and that would apply to Angelina, or to anyone else - and yes, people that do this are, in my opinion flaunting their sexuality - and exploiting it. You might not want to understand that because it doesn't suit your agenda to understand it - but that's my opinion and it isn't likely to change.

As for your 'jokes' - as Birdie says, pretty poor jokes. I simply do not buy your explanation - but then, as I said, you have an agenda, you have pre-conceived and erroneous notions of any criticism of that agenda - and no answer contrary to that agenda will ever suit you.

[boxtops]

I'm with maggie on this one, it makes not a tad of difference to me who they are, or what they get up to.

[naomi24]

Nor me Boxtops, and I'm with Maggie too - but this is a different issue.

[sp1814]

naomi24

I don't believe you would EVER look at some beautifully shot pictures of a straight couple and claim they were 'flaunting their sexuality' that is just weird.

The wedding album reference was their to focus your mind, because the shots of the two lads look very much like they could form a series of shots from a wedding.

Here's the truth - I your mind, gays flaunt their sexuality, and you would not say the same about exactly the same pictures of a straight couple.

The proof? You said that a couple's sex lives should remain private.

That's quite odd.

The reason I'm going back to this with you is because I genuinely can't see how you've drawn your conclusions.

Please explain what you mean about their sex lives.

Do you infer about people's sex lives just by looking at pictures of them together.

I'm not trying to deliberately misunderstand you - I genuinely, GENUINELY don't get where you're coming from.

[sp1814]

naomi24

I think you simply mad a mistake when you said "I don't appreciate anyone, gay or staight, flaunting their sexuality"

If you really meant that - then you wouldn't appreciate the sight of ANY demonstration of affection, and that would be a very, very, very sad existence.

Perhaps it was the way you phrased it? Maybe, "I don't appreciate anyone using their relationships for cheap publicity" is closer to the mark?

[naomi24]

SP, //Here's the truth - I your mind, gays flaunt their sexuality, and you would not say the same about exactly the same pictures of a straight couple. //

No, that is not the truth. Read what I said. That has come from YOUR mind - not mine. Once again your pre-conceived notions rear their ugly heads. Or is that another joke?

//The proof? You said that a couple's sex lives should remain private.//

And so they should - all couples. This is becoming very tedious SP. I meant what I said, I've given you my opinion and I do not agree with you.

[sp1814]

Tell me where they flaunt their sex lives.

Go on.

Tell me how a series of charming, beautifully shot pictures in any way alludes to someone's sex life.

I don't think you've explained yourself at all well, because you literally haven't explained how these pictures show people 'flaunting their sexuality'

And frankly - you wouldn't say the same about a straight couple.

Thats bull.

You would have to be the biggest prude in the world to look at a straight couple in the same poses say, 'they're flaunting their secuality'

I am willing to accept that you don't like the photos, but I do not believe you would use 'flaunting their sexuality' about a straight couple.

Nonsense.

I'm terminating this now, because you're not being truthful, and that's just disappointing, and sad.

You need not reply, I won't be reading it.

[sp1814]

Ignore the bit where I ask you to the pictures are some how linked to their sex lives. I have realised that I couldn't career less now, and have to get ready to go out to dinner.

Enjoy your evening.

[naomi24]

SP, you don't think I've explained myself at all well? Fine. I don't really care what you think, but make no mistake, I do not lie.

Have a good evening.