Stephen Gately and Jan Moir: apparently I\’m supposed to be outraged

I\’ve just had a Facebook request (no, I don\’t log into it) asking that the \”The Daily Mail should retract Jan Moir\’s hateful, homophobic article\”.

This one.

OK, it\’s a bit strong but…..I can imagine the same writer saying exactly the same things about someone who was in an open heterosexual relationship and then died in the same manner.

So, umm, \”homophobia\” I\’m not sure sticks. It\’s the \”shagging someone you\’re not married to while the person you are married to is dying on the sofa\” bit that seems to concern, not the implements or orifices that were being used to do the shagging.

And to claim that \”some homosexuals have open relationships therefore criticising open relationships is homophobia\” is simply nonsense.

60 comments on “Stephen Gately and Jan Moir: apparently I\’m supposed to be outraged

  1. That is rather interesting , I am meeting a couple of friends for a beer this Eve , they are married and gay. I cannot imagine they would involve a third Party for a second .I `ll ask what they think
    Jan Moir is right , people do not keel over at 33 for no good reason , well it is at least exceedingly rare.
    You do wonder why it is that adoption agencies can discriminate against anyone from smokers to Christians to white people but not gays . Hardly a unique qualification for child rearing by the look of it.

    I never belived this “Sudden Death Syndrome ” story

  2. I think your interpretation of that article is tendentious … and tenuous.

    As far as I can see, Jan Moir is saying that “there’s nothing natural” about his death because it resulted from the (presumably “unnatural”) gay lifestyle, and that these gays tell us they merit “understanding and tolerance” because they’re just like us heteros, but they’re not.

    I do not think that article is merely expressing disapproval of threesomes, or of sleeping with one person when you are married to somebody else.

    I am not sure that throwing up in your mouth and drowning after a night on the piss (if that is what happened) is one of the things that sets gays apart from the rest of us, either.

    I thought it was a revolting article, and frankly I’m surprised – not in a good way – at your reaction to it. I’d have expected different.

  3. Newmania; dying from fluid on the lungs is natural and unfortunately does happen to people with congenital heart conditions. It’s rare, but it does happen. On what medical basis do you ‘not believe’ in Sudden death syndrome?

  4. “Jan Moir is right , people do not keel over at 33 for no good reason ”

    Umm, actually, they do. For example, for pre-existing heart conditions. Which is what Gately had, according to his mum.

    Perhaps if Moir was a qualified medical expert, rather than an ex-restaurant critic who’s had one pie too many, you might have a point.

    P.

  5. The only really dumb part of her article is this:“Another real sadness about Gately’s death is that it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships.

    Gay activists are always calling for tolerance and understanding about same-sex relationships, arguing that they are just the same as heterosexual marriages. Not everyone, they say, is like George Michael. “

    One (even two) swallows do not make a summer, Jan. I know happily settled gay couples who wouldn’t dream of indulging in this sort of thing.

    It’s like judging all heterosexual relationships by the standards of serial shaggers like David Blunkett…

  6. ““Jan Moir is right , people do not keel over at 33 for no good reason ”

    Umm, actually, they do. For example, for pre-existing heart conditions. Which is what Gately had, according to his mum.”

    Gately’s mum is a qualified medical expert then?

  7. I don’t think the stupid thing is to assert that open relationships are more prevalent among gay couples than among heterosexual couples – for all we know, the probability distribution of “how likely are you to have a threesome” does differ between gays and straights … the stupid thing is to think this matters. And to think that “gay activists” justify claims for “tolerance and understanding” by arguing they are “just the same as heterosexual relationships” in this respect. As if a higher proportion of gays being “serial shaggers” would justify homophobic prejudices.

  8. “Gately’s mum is a qualified medical expert then?”

    Oh right, I see what you did there. I don’t suppose you’ve thought that it’s kind possible that someone’s mother – you know, the one who gave birth to him – is more familar with his medical history since childhood than, ooh, a random media pie-muncher?

    No, wait, it’s more much logical that he died coz he caught de Gays(tm).

    P.

  9. I can’t be bothered to read the article, but on another Gately story in the Mail I noticed that they referred to his “husband” whereas the Guardian referred to his “partner” which was kind of the opposite of what I would have expected.

  10. Perhaps you’re not outraged because you presumably don’t consider using the recent death of a man in his 30s to launch an attack on homosexuals, homosexuality & civil partnerships as outrageous.

    Well, the views expressed in Moir’s article and the decision to publish them are outrageous, your lack of outrage notwithstanding. However, it’s all grist to The Daily Mail’s mill. The continued existence of this newspaper is one of the biggest outrages in Britain.

  11. I’m unfortunate enough to have known two persons who were in very good physical shape and without any prior medical condition but who passed away in their sleep in their early 20s. Anyone who claims that this simply doesn’t happen clearly has no idea whatsoever what they’re talking about.

  12. @9, I agree with JuliaM shock! While the whole piece is prurient nastiness, the blatant homophobia is in saying “two famous gays died recently, therefore gaydom is an evil lifestyle”.

  13. “Oh right, I see what you did there. I don’t suppose you’ve thought that it’s kind possible that someone’s mother – you know, the one who gave birth to him – is more familar with his medical history since childhood than, ooh, a random media pie-muncher?”

    Let me check – is it the same mother that said ‘Oh, no, my son doesn’t do drugs’ shortly before the autopsy proved that he’d smoked cannabis?

  14. “…the blatant homophobia is in saying “two famous gays died recently, therefore gaydom is an evil lifestyle”.”

    Rather more likely that the true culprit is showbusiness, the club scene or the cult of celebrity.

  15. Typical John B , decide who the victim is and then once you have , assume nothing about them is less than perfect .
    Unity thinks because he can find Wikipedia that means an ice berg dropping from the sky is suddenly plausible , well I doubt it . I gather there are about 50 cases pa in the UK and that makes it in my view infinitely more likely is another explanation. Fair ?

    What interests me more in the aftermath of Matt Lucas`s happy marriage ( except the divorce drugs and suicide ) , is that the Gay arrangement. They claim it is not like my brother and I having a tax dodge because it is sanctioned by love ….. well this love is not of the kind I recognise from my own blissfully happy and perfect marriage . I do not suggest to Mrs. N that we pick up a cheapo prostitute and play unspeakably lewd games more than once or twice a month ( and at Christmas obviously )

    Will they be including this in the literature we are obliged to buy our children for their schools ? ‘Johnnie’s two daddies’ , I was acclimatised to ‘Johnnie’s two daddies and their prostitute sex games with a rent boy and drug crazed high risk life style’…. will be just to practice those jolly phonics on

    Tell you one thing though he had a nice voice Moiro is a bit harsh there

  16. Actually apparently healthy preople do keel over and die young. the reason being that actually they were not helthy. Sudden death in epilepsy is a cause, long QT syndrome another,and still others are caused by unexplained cardiac and nearological events. I know of two young seemingly healthy women who died in their twenties like this, one had sudden adult death syndrome, and the other one had a still undiagnosed condition that caused the blood vessels in her brain to suddenly constrict, all that is known is thta she had other relative swho died from the same thing although there is still no explaination as to why this happened. Both of them went to sleep feeling fine, and died in their sleep. I also knew a health teenager who dropped down dead on a fun run. Lets not forget death from undiagnosed anyeurisms, tumours DVTs etc.

  17. Newmania – Your unfounded association of all gay people to a niche lifestyle comes across as blatant homophobia. It’s not been shown even in the examples of Lucas/McGee or Gately/Cowles, that they indulged in anything out of the ordinary sexually. But even if they were “drug crazed” or holding “prostitute sex games with a rent boy”, to extrapolate from TWO examples to every gay couple in the country is simple, disgusting bigotry. I bet you could find to heterosexual couples who were drug addicted, and/or used prostitutes. Better take all children in heterosexual families into care then hadn’t we?

  18. I suffered sudden cardiac death last year. Fortunately it happened to me in daytime and my life was saved by a stranger who knew CPR. If it happened in the night, I’d be dead.

    I had no prior medical history and no medical reason was found for it. I’m not gay and I don’t take drugs.

    Moir has made the mistake of thinking that everyone is thinking what she’s thinking. She has found out that we are not.

  19. An ugly, fat, bitter and twisted ‘writer’ who probably only gets any kind of self satisfaction from endless eating of fattening food…her life’s gone down the pan and therefore using her prejuces to attract attention…This will however finish, hopefully, her ‘career’, -Jan, do not sign on to the DOLE, I wouldn’t like to pay your way

  20. This is a pathetic rhetorical trick where someone says “I am supposed to be outraged but I am not”. If you don’t care fine so why make a big deal out of not caring? Why not take a good opportunity to keep your metaphorical mouth shut?

    Deliberately trying to inflame people by being a smug show off makes you a person who does care, about themselves and being the centre of some attention. It’s called Narcissism.

    It’s the old school kids thing where everyone pretends they don’t care as some sort of strategy to look cool. Most people grow out of it.

    A lot of things do not outrage me but outrage others. Unless I can point to a reason for their anger being misdirected and the issue is important enough to me I say nothing.

  21. Should I say a prayer to the good Lord tonight that one of Ms Moir’s children (or perhaps a young relative of each of the correspondents above who support her) die of a rare illness so that a gutter journalist can fantasise about what might have been done by the clearly guilty victim did to bring about their own death ? The answer is “No” because I happen to have a modicum of human decency. What the hell is missing in people’s lives that they find such satisfaction in the death of this young man ?
    I have been impressed by the enormous number of complaints about this sad, tragic woman who has clearly led a very dull, unfulfilled sex life and is filled with loathing for someone who had the courage to live differently to her. Tonight I feel simultaneously ashamed of the fact I know Daily Mail readers and delighted at the colossal scale of the public reaction. On balance, I am proud to be British and suggest that those who think homosexuals are somehow deserving of early death should emigrate to Iran, where they can participate in the public execution of sodomites. Oooops – but that would mean living with Muslims. What’s a bigot to do ????

  22. What bollocks you write. Of course Moir is entitled to her opinion, free speech and all that. If she wasn’t hateful, she wouldn’t write for the ‘Daily Mail’, now would she?

    It’s a question of accuracy. Her insinuations are so tentative and such a distortion of the actual facts that she should be drummed out of journalism for that alone. Is she more qualified than a pathologist and a coroner? Did she fly out to examine the body? I think not.

    Furthermore, just because there was a man in the flat doesn’t mean they were having a threesome. No evidence for that.

    And she implies it’s an argument against gay partnerships. One in three marriages ends in divorce, and I’d lay bets that a fair few of them are as a result of infidelity.

    So why does she not just criticise those who cheat on their partners or indulge in licentious sexual activity? Because she’s a homophobe, patently.

  23. This morning Brighton’s Nikki Bayley (@nikkib on Twitter) made one of the first complaints in the country about the Daily Mail’s vile columnist Jan Moir and here cowardly homophobic attack on Stephen Gately. Here’s the Press Complaints Commission’s response http://tiny.cc/aPipa

  24. He’d smoked cannabis? My god, must be true then, And yeah, his mum’s no professional doctor! Unlike the coroner, who performed the autopsy. And stated an undiagnosed inherited heart condition.

    But yeah, he smoked cannabis apparently, and the Mail woman said it was a gay orgy, so that’s me convinced. It’s all a conspiracy, etc…

  25. Silly old you, Tim. Didn’t you realise that saying anything that at least one homosexual disapproves of is homophobia?

    That, in fact, is the definition of homophobia.

  26. “This is a pathetic rhetorical trick where someone says “I am supposed to be outraged but I am not”. If you don’t care fine so why make a big deal out of not caring? Why not take a good opportunity to keep your metaphorical mouth shut?”

    Piffling botty onions.

  27. This morning Brighton’s Nikki Bayley (@nikkib on Twitter) made one of the first complaints in the country about the Daily Mail’s vile columnist Jan Moir and here cowardly homophobic attack on Stephen Gately. Here’s the Press Complaints Commission’s response http://tiny.cc/aPipa

  28. JuliaM. I don’t know if you have kids but if you did and were a good mother you would probably know if they had existing health complaints. You would not have to be a qualified medical practitioner to know this.

  29. What about the fact it’s just an unnecessary attack on a dead guy, during bad timing?
    If it happened the night before or week before and they had been sitting on the sofa watching tv and drinking hot chocolate and one went to bed and overslept, one fell asleep on the couch and died, would he still be attacked like this? Like they were some kind of deviants? Based on one night? Oh WOW, they might have had a threesome or had gay sex the night they died, who gives a shit?

    You are obviously secretly homophobic, no one is asking you to be outraged, but have some fucking respect at LEAST and admit she was in the wrong. Her story contributed fuck all, and was clearly about him being gay, otherwise why mention civil partnerships to make her point.

    Also she says one of the most ridiculous things i’ve ever heard. That young healthy men don’t just drop dead. That alone shows how fucking brainless she is.

  30. hmmmmmmm
    Admittadly Moir could have been more subtle not really homophobic just a plain old bigot. Still she does have a point this whole press coverage does seem a little dumbed down. Found on a sette in a strange position choked on own vomit. If I were Andrew and a stranger was in the room and my husband was found dead I would too be asking questions. Why is no one suspicious… I smell a rat not a homophob.

  31. Who are you? And what the fuck is this nonsense about? You should do a Jan Moir and shove you head up your own arse so no one has to witness this utter crap that you both spout

    Tim adds: “Who are you?”

    There’s a clue up at the top of the page laddie.

  32. Newmania

    Ref your comments above.

    “well this love is not of the kind I recognise” – what? because they (or one of them with the other one’s knowledge) seem to have had consensual sex with a third adult while on holiday?

    I guess your morality’s different, but i dont think a loving relationship (and the right to marry) begins and ends with sexual fidelity. Its about trust, honesty and love. And I think the public reaction to the Jan Moir article shows more people now share my morality than yours.

  33. Nice one Tim.

    Everyone is going nuts about this Jan Moir article which basically says gay swingers lead dangerous lives. So what. So it’s fine for the Daily Mail to write any number of articles about other lifestyles being harmful, commenting on female stars promiscuity, single mums etc, gossiping about any manner of things, as they do almost weekly but NOT fine to write articles on gay people. But someone suggesting gay promiscuity is harmful? Well fuck, that’s VERBOTEN. So much so that a giant squealing community will have her reported to the PCC, insist she be fired, report her for a “hate crime” all in an attempt not simply to pillory her but to silence her. All as occurred via Twitter yesterday. A patently ridiculous overeaction and another move towards rightspeak. To quote the Telegraph:

    The social media world harbours some pretty smug and self-righteous individuals. The words “I’m sorry, but you’re not allowed to say that!” are never far from their lips – or, to put it another way, only liberals are allowed to be offensive.

  34. I don’t see how him smoking cannabis in a country where it is de-criminalized is any different than him having a pint in the UK. It certainly doesn’t prove he used harder drugs, the sort that would kill him. The post mortem would have turned up those results so we can clearly say HE DID NOT TAKE ANY ILLEGAL DRUGS IN THE DAYS AND HOURS LEADING UP TO HIS DEATH.

    To imply that he might have because he smoked a legal substance is ridiculous.

    Alison, you are a moron. If Stephen Gately had died as a result of ‘the gay swinger lifestyle’ then it would have made sense. But Jan Moir made it seem like he did just to prove a point. Yes, all of the Daily Mail’s stories are rubbish, but this one is just inaccurate, it’s a deliberate smear.

  35. Don’t be so obnoxious and pathetic Fatty. Made it seem like he did? That’s called an OPINION. It’s not a statement of empirical fact. It’s her opinion on a lifestyle and the manner of his death. And she is entitled to it. My main point was the ridiculous and retarded campaign to have that opinion silenced, prosecuted for hate speech and then see her fired. Are you that precious?

    What’s so different between her style on Gately and her style on Goody?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1164030/JAN-MOIR-Jade-unique-brave-girl-But-lets-pretend-saint.html

  36. No. The shocking point about the article was not that she was expessing an opinion with which many here disagree. She is entitled to her opinion and others are entitled to disagree with her. Jan Moir and the Daily Mail overstepped the line when she implied that his lifestyle caused his death, that he was setting a bad example and that the coroner, the police and his mother were lying when they said his death was from natural causes.
    A newspaper has authority and is to be believed. They have a duty to check the facts in all of the articles released. She may have an ‘opinion’ but it should be based on facts and not incorporate misinformation. If Ms Moir and her readership hanker for better days when people had higher moral standards, they should be reminded that respect for the dead and the protection of other people’s privacy were central to that standard. The fact is he died of natural causes, therefore, the presene of a third person and what he was doing in the flat that night is compltely irrelevant. He could quite easily have just been sleeping there. Speculation on the precise nature of his activities that night are selacious, obtrusive and not worthy of comment.

  37. Anyone who winds up that bloated, self-important creep Stephen Fry is a friend of mine. I once heard him described as ‘the perfect talk show guest’, What viler thing could you say about a man?

  38. I’m not so sure she implied that at all but I suppose some people might glean it and take a gossip column in Femail as factual. More fool them. She implies all sorts about everyone. Speculation is the same as gossip. That’s what her column is. Turn the page. Or is it that we in this country rely on op-eds and gossip columns so much that turning the page is an impossible task.

    This all reminds me of that ruckus in America with Perez Hilton and the Beauty Queen. Only in reverse. The gossip columnist was revered then. I guess some gossipers views and actions are more valid and acceptable than others.

  39. How dare this guy have something rather nasty happen to him AND be gay AND be in a civil partnership!

    They HAVE to be linked, its obvious. the final piece of proof if it were ever needed – the coroner, who is clearly in cahoots with the family and their solicitor, has concocted some cock and bull story about some illness that Jan has never heard of!

    It must be a tissue of lies, it just must … and even if it isn’t, he’s gay after all! How dare he have achieved something in life and been happy!

    The article was vile, written by a twisted, bitter old bigot. Stand with her if you will – I’m sure it’ll do your reputation no good.

  40. Pingback: Pink mafia at it again | nourishing obscurity

  41. Yesterday morning Brighton’s Nikki Bayley (@nikkib on Twitter) made one of the first complaints in the country about the Daily Mail’s vile columnist Jan Moir and here cowardly homophobic attack on Stephen Gately. Here’s the Press Complaints Commission’s response http://tiny.cc/aPipa

  42. Jan Moir’s comments may have been valid but her timing was atrocious. She should have left her speculation and comments until after the funeral.

  43. A little sanity – thanks Tim.

    To all those Hitler Youth members here who reckon that criticising Moir is just as valid as is her original criticisms, in terms of free speech, yes – you’re quite right. When you lot are stepping over the line is in 1) demanding she be *prosecuted* for the offence of holding different opinions – as the Met are now apparantly considering, 2) demanding all media voices conform to the same PC identikit beliefs.

    This is not “social liberalism”, this is a fascism with better PR. You are repellent people. You are not the good guys. Please think on this.

  44. Tim Worstall says: “It’s the “shagging someone you’re not married to while the person you are married to is dying on the sofa” bit that seems to concern, not the implements or orifices that were being used to do the shagging.”

    If that really was the case, Tim, then why did Jan Moir bring up Kevin McGee and Matt Lucas? There was no similar concern to be had in their case. Therefore the only inference that can be made is that Moir thinks that these unrelated tragedies were problematic due to the fact that the men involved were gay.

    Alison – assuming one accepts that it’s ok to imply “all sorts about everyone”, and that the context of a gossip column should allow any sort of speculation about a person, this particular column is still unacceptable because it is vastly different.

    The implications she makes are not simply that Stephen Gately’s lifestyle lead to his death, but that in some unspecified way, his homosexuality was part of the problem. In doing so she goes beyond the ‘casual’ offence of “implying all sorts about everyone”, and in fact implies vague and unfounded, yet potent negativity about an entire group. It’s straightforward bigotry. It breaches Section 12 of the PCC Code of Practice.

    And that is not to mention that she does this by directly contradicting the evidence that exists.

    You say about her comments “It’s not a statement of empirical fact. It’s her opinion on a lifestyle and the manner of his death”.
    Well, if her opinion about the manner of his death directly contradicts the empirical facts that are known (which it does), then her comments distort the relevant information, and mislead the person reading the article. This breaches Section 1 of the PCC Code of Practice.

    You also state: “So it’s fine for the Daily Mail to write any number of articles about other lifestyles being harmful, commenting on female stars promiscuity, single mums etc, gossiping about any manner of things, as they do almost weekly but NOT fine to write articles on gay people.”

    Yes. That’s right. Section 12 of the PCC Code of Practice states:

    i) The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability.

    The reason these groupings of people have been included on this list is because they are considered vulnerable. Negative statements about these groups are prevalent, and often harmful to people who are part of a particular group. Promiscuous female stars and single mums are not included in this list because they are not considered vulnerable – negative statements that have been made about either of these groups has not been considered to cause harm to the members of these groups.

    As for pejorative statements about individuals, made acceptable by the prevalence of gossip columns – they may not get the backlash that statements about entire groups like this do, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t also offensive or harmful. The press publishes a lot of disgustingly innacurate and offensive material, meaning that the public has to pick its battles.

    Ben

  45. Come on Jan Moir, spit it out.” Pretty boy dies at the hands of two big hunks” Gets the old juices following, nod nod wink wink.

  46. How pathetic

    “Promiscuous female stars and single mums are not included in this list because they are not considered vulnerable”

    There are way more attacks on women than there are on gay men on any given day of the week and such people are still female Ben, since you need to rely on group identity.

    This ridiculous obsession the gay lobby has with itself is totally out of proportion to any legitimate concerns it raises about legal issues. How extraordinarily precious to pursue someone for hate speech and get the Met involved. Did Stephen Fry feel more “vulnerable” at the end of the day in comparison to any of the people Moir discussed in her pernicious columns (Jade Goody for instance)? So essentially one identity group trumps another and is entitled to such protection by screaming “not fair” and effectively shutting down free speech. Your argument is both divisive and absurd Ben.

    It was idle gossip. Get over it.

  47. Pingback: Liberal Conspiracy » Right-whingers cry ‘censorship’ over Jan Moir

  48. “Tim Worstall is an Englishman who has failed at many things. Thus his turn to writing, the last refuge of many who could make a living no other way.”
    – I can see why you may have failed at many things, now you can add another thing you’ve failed at to the list if this article is anything to go by.

    “Odd bits and pieces of his writing have been known to turn up in The Times, the book pages of the Daily Telegraph and the Philadelphia Inquirer”
    Turn up? I dare say not much has turned up in many a year, I’ve never heard of you. Who are you to give an opinion on something that doesn’t concern you? Especially such a flippant and callous one with no forethought or consideration. Keep your rantings to Twitter, or better still – yourself

    Tim adds: You might be having reading comprehension problems there.

    “Who are you to give an opinion on something that doesn’t concern you?”

    If you look up at the top you’ll see that someone had actually asked me to express my opinion on this matter via Facebook.

  49. Idle gossip doesn’t have to be consumed. It’s a choice? Sooner or later news will no longer be free on the net. When Murdoch gets his way. As useful as it has been to Outraged from Twitter if you have to pay for your idle gossip again it might not make the outrages so accessible. Or relevant.

  50. Worstall, you’re a smug goon who’s completely missed the point of the outrage, which is quite legitimate. Learn how to read and digest a newspaper article before pontificating about it.

  51. Pingback: General Anaesthetic Taking the edge off.

  52. Although it was a hateful and unkind article why the surprise about another homphobic comment published in our Daily Journal of Hate the Daily Mail? This week gay people, next week asylum seekers. I wish this could be the beginning of a concerted campaign against that peddlar of hatred and prejudice that my mother still reads!

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.