I think every group that's ever stood up for its rights has been accused of making things worse for themselves by being so uppity. A gay man like Graham Norton really should know better. I guess once you're part of the elite the appeal of a 'negative peace' becomes much more alluring...
In 1972 at the women's center in Cambridge, Massachusetts, women were already aware that gay men would just as soon throw them under the bus, particularly the gay men with large double incomes. They do not see themselves as having interests in common with lesbians, let alone women in general.
He is a "popular" gay man... Who feels the need to let his belly rumble on a regular basis to maintain his "popularity". More to be pitied than anything else, poor deluded lamb!
The Sunday Times ran an interview with Graham Norton last week in which he said JK Rowling had “problematic” views. The ST didn’t say what those views were, provide any context or challenge that opinion in any way.
However, yesterday the ST published four letters, including one from me, under the heading “Graham Norton’s problem isn’t JK Rowling, but women” (see https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/graham-nortons-problem-isnt-jk-rowling-but-women-l3dsdx9l7 - it’s behind a pay wall, but if you register you can view at least one article per week free). All four letters supported JK Rowling and made clear that Graham Norton is the one with the problem.
I think that’s an encouraging sign that if we push back against this incredibly unfair movement we can succeed.
I wouldn’t have written to the ST were it not for all the very useful information and encouragement not to accept things as they are that Glinner provides us with.
It’s so shameful that his friends, or former friends, aren’t there for him and the Father Ted the Musical remains on hold, especially given that the movement attacking people like him and JK Rowling has so little substance.
And Count Arthur Strong, which I’ve watched and rewatched, is brilliant.
I'm a subscriber so I can create share tokens (don't know if there are limits to their use!).
The Times is generally on the GC side and has attracted quite a lot of women readers because of that. Gender / trans articles get a huge number of very informed comments (> 95% GC) and I reckon have been responsible for peaking a lot of people.
As a matter of fairness, if you are going to report on such accusations some context should also be provided. For example, what are these “problematic” views? The prime one is that she believes that biological males should in appropriate circumstances be restricted from accessing spaces reserved for biological females: something that has always been provided for by the Equality Act 2010 (which is hardly a piece of right wing legislation) and an opinion that is shared by a large number of people in the UK.
Publishing without any context these unfair attacks on JK Rowling (and others who publicly agree with her) gives the false impression that she believes something truly outrageous, when in actual fact even if you disagree with her opinions they are much moderate than often appears to be the case. It’s a form of bias and it should cease.”
Well said Graham and shame on you Graham Norton. Shame on you for lazy thinking. Shame on you for turning a bling eye to what is being done to children most likely to be gay or lesbian and often autistic. Shame on you for ignoring the safety and rights of women. Shame on you for being ok with JKR getting rape and death threats. Shame on you for being able to sleep at night, protecting your career at the expense of all these people. And shame on you for being a coward who, instead of at least shutting up, is adding fuel to the flames by characterisng JKR as problematic. You know what is really going on. It's just not happening to you.
He, like so many others who do have a platform and voice, is a gutless fuck. When this lunacy has come to an end, and the bodies are being counted, I'll be interested to see if they're as prepared to offer their opinion. If not, why not? They had a particular stance they wanted to talk about before, even if it was to feign neutrality. And the position some took was far from that, and they used it to criticise and attack people who didn't share it.
Presumably, plenty will be keen to distance themselves from all that by then, the crap about transphobia and bigotry. It never happened, they were only talking about some people, they were misinterpreted, they didn't realise what was really happening, etc. They can't be allowed to to do that. They do realise what's happening, they know what the consequences are for women, children and gay men and they're okay with it. But for those who are not, they need to say it now.
Thank you, my dear, for calling him what he is, a gutless fuck. I'm tired of excuses for cowardly men and women who are just simply cowards. Cowards have a lot to do with the world we live in, people to whom conformity and comfort are far more important than truth and decency.
Sadly, I think we're going to have to hold our tongues and allow these people to weasel word their way back from the dark side. This is a big fight and we will not win it if we alienate people as they try to recant. The publication of the final Cass report will give some an excuse, hopefully the exposure of Mermaids will be another opportunity.
I don't want to be 'understanding', generous or forgiving but I'm prepared to pretend I am if it leads to the right result.
In my fantasy, and I hope soon reality, there is no longer a big fight, enough sanity was restored and it's almost over. Now, the priority is to think about how to care for the people, particularly the children and young people, damaged by widespread acquiescence to a pernicious ideology/cult and subjected to medical experimentation.
I don't feel inclined to affect generosity towards people like Graham Norton, Matt Lucas or the coterie of shitheads from the Harry Potter films. They aren't vulnerable. Maybe they'll feel bad about themselves and their behaviour, which will probably be true, as by this time it will have stopped being advantageous for them.
Father Noel Furlong is such a disappointment. There is no 'neutral' view in this vital matter, and his is far beyond neutral. Such a misuse of his platform. Imagine having such a powerful voice and not using it for good. Regret is his future.
Noel Furlong! I always think of him as Noel Early because that was his first name until we did a name check (which you always have to do) and it turned out there was a Father Noel Early who played guitar!
It would be mega hard to find venues brave enough to host that, but a great idea all the same. GL is a fantastic raconteur. Who wouldn't want to fork out for a great evening with him? Imagine what a smash 'Father Ted the Musical' will be as well when it comes out. GL has made huge sacrifices to heed his conscience, and being denied this, while not the greatest, is still enormous. I don't think he's going to regret though not choosing to be a worthless pile of excrement instead though, like so many have chosen to be.
Let's respect reality on all fronts - Graham Norton has his show because he's a truly awesome talent. A talent so big in fact, if anyone could run the risk of incurring the wrath of big trans, it's him, but he ducked his moment.
Hi everyone, I'm trying to track down the firm who sells Mermaids the breast binders that they send out.Any info welcome!
I came across 'Britains first breast binding company' called 'Spectrum Outfitters' (which raised my eyebrow as sounds like it's demographic customer base may be autistic kids- very much my area. On Companies House I found its an operation run by one trans person acting as secretart and director.Unlikely to supply Mermaids who I assume buy wholesale.
I heard the nasty little creep on BBC R4’s ‘Today’ Prog this morning - & that was just fawning Martha Kearney, who normally I quite like. Policeman Norton replied to Martha’s flirty set-up: “So do you think JK Rowling’s a transphobe?” with: “You only need to say something once.”
Ok, Graham, Sir. Anything you say, Sir. Forgive us for daring to speak, or have legitimate concerns, Sir.
It’s as if they’re in a mutual appreciation society saying to each other: “We’re all in our cosy celebrity luvvie club; aren’t we gorgeous; & the rest of the nasty, ignorant knuckle-dragging hateful transphobes are out there. Aren’t we SO COOL?”
Yeah; it’s really cool to slyly pour scorn on & ridicule people who are simply concerned about the numbers of girls having mastectomies. That’s really cool. It’s really cool that men can say they’re women & crash women’s sport & safe spaces. It’s so funky to castrates young males who are confused about their sexuality because the gender cult has taken hold on them & society.
I hope if he ever gets to read this he’s holding onto his bollocks at the thought of what could have happened to him if the trans cult was operating when he was a young lad / teenager. It could’ve been you, Norton.
In Scotland we have possibly the 'gayest' parliament in the world, including 'dear leader'. You might think some of them would be wondering how they might have felt being gaslit and 'trans'd'.
But no, captured completely and wilfully ignorant. Instead of looking carefully at the Cass Review they claim to be doing their own investigation into the kids gender clinic at Sandyford. Intend to publish guidance in 18months time.
The SNP have truly ruined the image of Scotland. I dearly wish to keep the union, but I hope Alex Salmond's Alba Party make inroads into the genderqueer SNP. What are Scots thinking of voting for such abominations?
They're just appeasing evil for the sake of a quiet life. The bells are tolling, and for whom they toll are those who will stand at the bar of history.
Thing is Graham….a lot of people not understanding why Gay Men are not on our side are unable to accept that a lot of gay men hate women with a vengeance. Many don’t. We have the wonderful Mr Menno of course. But what other explanation is there?
I've never met a gay man who hates women with a vengeance. There are plenty of other explanations - self preservation, lack of understanding, cowardice, brainwashing, selfishness, manipulation, fear. All things that could also be true of the straight women who push this ideology. This issue, while particularly harmful to females, is also very harmful to bi and gay men, and male children.
There are gay men who hate women with a vengeance even though you are fortunate enough not to have met any. There are gay men who will frankly tell you that they think women's bodies are disgusting and abhorrent. There are gay men who by their every action make it clear they despise women. It isn't nice to see, it isn't pleasant to have to face, but it exists, believe me. I should provide you with the link to the Feminist Current discussion about gay men sexually harassing and RAPING women; someone posted it recently on Spinster.
You went from gay men hate women to gay men rape women very quickly. Anyway, why single out gay men? They are not immune to being misogynistic. They are still men.
That's exactly the point. Many women who are aware of how much many straight men hate women are shocked to discover that gay men often also hate women, sometimes even more than straight men. I wasn't singling out gay men; you made the point that you have never met gay men who hate women with a vengeance. I love commenters who bring something up then ask why someone else replies to the topic they just brought up!
In my experience as a member of the meat and two veg community, I've only ever met one misogynist in my 58 years. Not a homosexual one either. The overwhelming number of men love women. Anecdotally, I think there's a significant streak of mutual dislike between lesbians and homosexuals. That stuff you brought up though about homosexuals raping women, that's a new one on me!
The 'You went from gay men hate women to gay men rape women very quickly' was directed at you. The 'Anyway, why single out gay men? They are not immune to being misogynistic. They are still men' was a general point in relation to the original comment.
I heard him on Radio 4 this morning. He accused JKR of making things worse!
What a little toad he is!
I think every group that's ever stood up for its rights has been accused of making things worse for themselves by being so uppity. A gay man like Graham Norton really should know better. I guess once you're part of the elite the appeal of a 'negative peace' becomes much more alluring...
In 1972 at the women's center in Cambridge, Massachusetts, women were already aware that gay men would just as soon throw them under the bus, particularly the gay men with large double incomes. They do not see themselves as having interests in common with lesbians, let alone women in general.
He's a TOTAL A GRADE TOAD - and I know that because I know people who were at uni with him.
He is a "popular" gay man... Who feels the need to let his belly rumble on a regular basis to maintain his "popularity". More to be pitied than anything else, poor deluded lamb!
The Sunday Times ran an interview with Graham Norton last week in which he said JK Rowling had “problematic” views. The ST didn’t say what those views were, provide any context or challenge that opinion in any way.
However, yesterday the ST published four letters, including one from me, under the heading “Graham Norton’s problem isn’t JK Rowling, but women” (see https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/graham-nortons-problem-isnt-jk-rowling-but-women-l3dsdx9l7 - it’s behind a pay wall, but if you register you can view at least one article per week free). All four letters supported JK Rowling and made clear that Graham Norton is the one with the problem.
I think that’s an encouraging sign that if we push back against this incredibly unfair movement we can succeed.
I wouldn’t have written to the ST were it not for all the very useful information and encouragement not to accept things as they are that Glinner provides us with.
It’s so shameful that his friends, or former friends, aren’t there for him and the Father Ted the Musical remains on hold, especially given that the movement attacking people like him and JK Rowling has so little substance.
And Count Arthur Strong, which I’ve watched and rewatched, is brilliant.
This should give you access to the page
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0e87d59e-3a95-11ed-8e9a-562640d83f98?shareToken=89260f90d4306380db027ee76c6c392f
Thanks, that link does give access and I was surprised at how supportive of JKR those letters actually are!
I'm a subscriber so I can create share tokens (don't know if there are limits to their use!).
The Times is generally on the GC side and has attracted quite a lot of women readers because of that. Gender / trans articles get a huge number of very informed comments (> 95% GC) and I reckon have been responsible for peaking a lot of people.
Great letter and glad it wasn't the only one.
Thank you. This is the original letter, but they edited it a fair bit.
“I was very disappointed to read, in https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/graham-norton-interview-forever-home-show-chat-t2wsvmnpw, another unfair attack on JK Rowling in your newspaper. Once again she is maligned as having “problematic” views without any discussion as to whether or not her views really are problematic.
As a matter of fairness, if you are going to report on such accusations some context should also be provided. For example, what are these “problematic” views? The prime one is that she believes that biological males should in appropriate circumstances be restricted from accessing spaces reserved for biological females: something that has always been provided for by the Equality Act 2010 (which is hardly a piece of right wing legislation) and an opinion that is shared by a large number of people in the UK.
Publishing without any context these unfair attacks on JK Rowling (and others who publicly agree with her) gives the false impression that she believes something truly outrageous, when in actual fact even if you disagree with her opinions they are much moderate than often appears to be the case. It’s a form of bias and it should cease.”
A TRA on Twitter has implied that if you're concerned about binders, but not unregulated clothes and makeup then you're transphobic.
Graham Norton you absolute coward - these cowards are small, but the cowards out there are far away.
YES Graham Norton stop being a coward!
Well said Graham and shame on you Graham Norton. Shame on you for lazy thinking. Shame on you for turning a bling eye to what is being done to children most likely to be gay or lesbian and often autistic. Shame on you for ignoring the safety and rights of women. Shame on you for being ok with JKR getting rape and death threats. Shame on you for being able to sleep at night, protecting your career at the expense of all these people. And shame on you for being a coward who, instead of at least shutting up, is adding fuel to the flames by characterisng JKR as problematic. You know what is really going on. It's just not happening to you.
He, like so many others who do have a platform and voice, is a gutless fuck. When this lunacy has come to an end, and the bodies are being counted, I'll be interested to see if they're as prepared to offer their opinion. If not, why not? They had a particular stance they wanted to talk about before, even if it was to feign neutrality. And the position some took was far from that, and they used it to criticise and attack people who didn't share it.
Presumably, plenty will be keen to distance themselves from all that by then, the crap about transphobia and bigotry. It never happened, they were only talking about some people, they were misinterpreted, they didn't realise what was really happening, etc. They can't be allowed to to do that. They do realise what's happening, they know what the consequences are for women, children and gay men and they're okay with it. But for those who are not, they need to say it now.
Thank you, my dear, for calling him what he is, a gutless fuck. I'm tired of excuses for cowardly men and women who are just simply cowards. Cowards have a lot to do with the world we live in, people to whom conformity and comfort are far more important than truth and decency.
Sadly, I think we're going to have to hold our tongues and allow these people to weasel word their way back from the dark side. This is a big fight and we will not win it if we alienate people as they try to recant. The publication of the final Cass report will give some an excuse, hopefully the exposure of Mermaids will be another opportunity.
I don't want to be 'understanding', generous or forgiving but I'm prepared to pretend I am if it leads to the right result.
In my fantasy, and I hope soon reality, there is no longer a big fight, enough sanity was restored and it's almost over. Now, the priority is to think about how to care for the people, particularly the children and young people, damaged by widespread acquiescence to a pernicious ideology/cult and subjected to medical experimentation.
I don't feel inclined to affect generosity towards people like Graham Norton, Matt Lucas or the coterie of shitheads from the Harry Potter films. They aren't vulnerable. Maybe they'll feel bad about themselves and their behaviour, which will probably be true, as by this time it will have stopped being advantageous for them.
Support for JKR is THE ethical litmus test for everyone in this 'problematic' age. So many people are failing -- left, right, and centre.
Father Noel Furlong is such a disappointment. There is no 'neutral' view in this vital matter, and his is far beyond neutral. Such a misuse of his platform. Imagine having such a powerful voice and not using it for good. Regret is his future.
Noel Furlong! I always think of him as Noel Early because that was his first name until we did a name check (which you always have to do) and it turned out there was a Father Noel Early who played guitar!
Have you considered doing 'An Evening With Graham Linehan' show where you discuss your work?
It would be mega hard to find venues brave enough to host that, but a great idea all the same. GL is a fantastic raconteur. Who wouldn't want to fork out for a great evening with him? Imagine what a smash 'Father Ted the Musical' will be as well when it comes out. GL has made huge sacrifices to heed his conscience, and being denied this, while not the greatest, is still enormous. I don't think he's going to regret though not choosing to be a worthless pile of excrement instead though, like so many have chosen to be.
I call my sister Fr Noel when she’s being annoyingly and aggressively cheerful !
Father Brian Eno wouldn’t stand for this shit!
Imagine not even contacting Graham privately - says it all really.
Graham Norton - who wouldn’t have the career he has now if his profile hadn’t been raised by appearing in Father Ted.
My understanding was he got his Channel 4 Chat Show as a direct result of Channel 4 Father Ted!
Let's respect reality on all fronts - Graham Norton has his show because he's a truly awesome talent. A talent so big in fact, if anyone could run the risk of incurring the wrath of big trans, it's him, but he ducked his moment.
My point being that yes, while he is talented, his role on Fr. Ted no doubt opened the door to his first chat show.
Hi everyone, I'm trying to track down the firm who sells Mermaids the breast binders that they send out.Any info welcome!
I came across 'Britains first breast binding company' called 'Spectrum Outfitters' (which raised my eyebrow as sounds like it's demographic customer base may be autistic kids- very much my area. On Companies House I found its an operation run by one trans person acting as secretart and director.Unlikely to supply Mermaids who I assume buy wholesale.
I wonder if they have a label with the name?
I know, thought the same, not visible on Mermaids merch site as far as I could tell
What is going on here exactly? Is he being compelled to do this? He's not an idiot.
What’s going on here is a nasty narcissistic little creep.
I heard the nasty little creep on BBC R4’s ‘Today’ Prog this morning - & that was just fawning Martha Kearney, who normally I quite like. Policeman Norton replied to Martha’s flirty set-up: “So do you think JK Rowling’s a transphobe?” with: “You only need to say something once.”
Ok, Graham, Sir. Anything you say, Sir. Forgive us for daring to speak, or have legitimate concerns, Sir.
It’s as if they’re in a mutual appreciation society saying to each other: “We’re all in our cosy celebrity luvvie club; aren’t we gorgeous; & the rest of the nasty, ignorant knuckle-dragging hateful transphobes are out there. Aren’t we SO COOL?”
Yeah; it’s really cool to slyly pour scorn on & ridicule people who are simply concerned about the numbers of girls having mastectomies. That’s really cool. It’s really cool that men can say they’re women & crash women’s sport & safe spaces. It’s so funky to castrates young males who are confused about their sexuality because the gender cult has taken hold on them & society.
I hope if he ever gets to read this he’s holding onto his bollocks at the thought of what could have happened to him if the trans cult was operating when he was a young lad / teenager. It could’ve been you, Norton.
Re: Holding onto his bollocks....
In Scotland we have possibly the 'gayest' parliament in the world, including 'dear leader'. You might think some of them would be wondering how they might have felt being gaslit and 'trans'd'.
But no, captured completely and wilfully ignorant. Instead of looking carefully at the Cass Review they claim to be doing their own investigation into the kids gender clinic at Sandyford. Intend to publish guidance in 18months time.
FFS - I despair, I really do.
The SNP have truly ruined the image of Scotland. I dearly wish to keep the union, but I hope Alex Salmond's Alba Party make inroads into the genderqueer SNP. What are Scots thinking of voting for such abominations?
They're just appeasing evil for the sake of a quiet life. The bells are tolling, and for whom they toll are those who will stand at the bar of history.
O well guess Norton is on my shit list now as well
Not watched him for years mind as he turned into an arsehole so I doubt he’ll notice
Thing is Graham….a lot of people not understanding why Gay Men are not on our side are unable to accept that a lot of gay men hate women with a vengeance. Many don’t. We have the wonderful Mr Menno of course. But what other explanation is there?
I've never met a gay man who hates women with a vengeance. There are plenty of other explanations - self preservation, lack of understanding, cowardice, brainwashing, selfishness, manipulation, fear. All things that could also be true of the straight women who push this ideology. This issue, while particularly harmful to females, is also very harmful to bi and gay men, and male children.
There are gay men who hate women with a vengeance even though you are fortunate enough not to have met any. There are gay men who will frankly tell you that they think women's bodies are disgusting and abhorrent. There are gay men who by their every action make it clear they despise women. It isn't nice to see, it isn't pleasant to have to face, but it exists, believe me. I should provide you with the link to the Feminist Current discussion about gay men sexually harassing and RAPING women; someone posted it recently on Spinster.
You went from gay men hate women to gay men rape women very quickly. Anyway, why single out gay men? They are not immune to being misogynistic. They are still men.
That's exactly the point. Many women who are aware of how much many straight men hate women are shocked to discover that gay men often also hate women, sometimes even more than straight men. I wasn't singling out gay men; you made the point that you have never met gay men who hate women with a vengeance. I love commenters who bring something up then ask why someone else replies to the topic they just brought up!
In my experience as a member of the meat and two veg community, I've only ever met one misogynist in my 58 years. Not a homosexual one either. The overwhelming number of men love women. Anecdotally, I think there's a significant streak of mutual dislike between lesbians and homosexuals. That stuff you brought up though about homosexuals raping women, that's a new one on me!
The 'You went from gay men hate women to gay men rape women very quickly' was directed at you. The 'Anyway, why single out gay men? They are not immune to being misogynistic. They are still men' was a general point in relation to the original comment.