Gays granted asylum

M

mistersloane

heavy heavy monster sound
Supreme Court judge Lord Rodger said gay people’s right to live freely must be protected.
He said: “Just as male hetero sexuals are free to enjoy themselves playing rugby, drinking beer and talking about girls with their mates, so male homosexuals are to be free to enjoy themselves going to Kylie concerts, drinking exotically-coloured cocktails and talking about boys with their straight female mates.”

Wow. I feel so free to exist without demeaning prejudicial stereotyping.
 
C

crackerjack

Well-known member
mistersloane said:
Supreme Court judge Lord Rodger said gay people’s right to live freely must be protected.
He said: “Just as male hetero sexuals are free to enjoy themselves playing rugby, drinking beer and talking about girls with their mates, so male homosexuals are to be free to enjoy themselves going to Kylie concerts, drinking exotically-coloured cocktails and talking about boys with their straight female mates.”

Wow. I feel so free to exist without demeaning prejudicial stereotyping.
Click to expand...

Are these strictly defined parameters to our freedom? I mean, as a straight man do I have to play rugby? If I went gay to avoid it, would I have to listen to Kylie?
 
D

droid

Guest
It is progress surely? Isnt this the first time that anyone has been granted asylum because of persecution based on their sexuality?

asylumgay.jpg
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
A typical homosexual, yesterday:

elton+john.jpg


Edit: what about lesbians? Are they presumably granted the universal freedom to play golf, listen to KD Lang and wear dungarees?
 
Last edited:
M

mistersloane

heavy heavy monster sound
droid said:
It is progress surely? Isnt this the first time that anyone has been granted asylum because of persecution based on their sexuality?

asylumgay.jpg
Click to expand...

Yeah course it's progress, don't get me wrong, it's just the stereotyping that depresses me. It's like one step forward and two steps back.

ed : Actually, it doesn't depress me, it makes me blindly, furiously angry.
 
Last edited:
M

mistersloane

heavy heavy monster sound
Mr. Tea said:
A typical homosexual, yesterday:

elton+john.jpg


Edit: what about lesbians? Are they presumably granted the universal freedom to play golf, listen to KD Lang and wear dungarees?
Click to expand...

Lol never seen that picture before. Lesbians don't count because they still don't officially exist in the UK, do they? Queen Victoria and all that.
 
D

droid

Guest
mistersloane said:
Yeah course it's progress, don't get me wrong, it's just the stereotyping that depresses me. It's like one step forward and two steps back.

ed : Actually, it doesn't depress me, it makes me blindly, furiously angry.
Click to expand...

Not to negate your anger/depression, but surely the landmark decision for gay rights overshadows the stupid language of the judge?

Its more like 20 steps forward whilst the officials prattle on about how effeminate your shorts are. ;)

Something to be happy about anyway. I wonder how this will affect JA asylum seekers?
 
STN

STN

sou'wester
mistersloane said:
male homosexuals are to be free to enjoy themselves going to Kylie concerts, drinking exotically-coloured cocktails and talking about boys with their straight female mates.”
Click to expand...

I love the idea that one would travel to the UK from some far-away country having been given a load of shit, leaving all your mates and family, go through all the hassles of getting asylum, and then immediately sit down and start doing all these things: 'right then, where's my pineapple margarita...'
 
highhhness

highhhness

one does
droid said:
It is progress surely? Isnt this the first time that anyone has been granted asylum because of persecution based on their sexuality?
Click to expand...

Not the first, although I think grants on the basis are pretty low. the judgement doesn't really say anything about the 'discretion' argument either - that you can go back to a different bit of the country and you know, just be a bit secret about it.

Never fear though - anne widdecombe has a view. vaguely powell-esque, the last line, i thought...http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/186704
 
highhhness

highhhness

one does
IdleRich said:
Unbelievable
Click to expand...

not really. it's age-old lifestyle choice vs. state of being, with a healthy dose of xenophobia chucked in. and wholesale missing of the point that you'd still need to evidence your claim and prove ongoing danger of individual persecution - and presumably an innate liking for kylie - rather than just turn up, limp up your wrist and state your gayness.

it's positive anyway, overall.
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Arguing with this kind of bigotry is invariably going to be as rewarding as bashing your head against a brick wall, but has anyone got any figures on the actual number of asylum applicants this ruling is likely to affect each year? My guess is that it's probably going to be pretty tiny compared to either refugees fleeing persecution on other grounds or war/famine/disaster generally, or to economic migrants, whether they're here legally or not.
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
It just demonstrates exactly the kind of prejudice these poor people are fleeing in the first place.
 
highhhness

highhhness

one does
IdleRich said:
Sometimes I forget what utter cunts these people are... but then they go and remind you.
Click to expand...

quite.

i take it back re: the discretion argument - supreme court actually expressly rejected that:

In 2009 the Court of Appeal determined that asylum could be refused if it was considered that it would be ‘reasonably tolerable’ for the applicant to conceal their sexual identity in their country of origin. On 7 July 2010 the Supreme Court unanimously rejected this argument. The Court found that a person must not be expected to suppress their sexual orientation in order to avoid future persecution, and issued detailed guidance on the approach to be taken towards these cases in the future.

MPs briefing here

I'm not sure that there is a resource that details reasons for claiming asylum proportionately across cases - would happily be corrected on that. It would depend on UKBA to compile it, I think, and they have trouble picking up the phone/adhering to the law, and so on. Although I'd guess Mr Tea's right on proportionately less claims based on sexuality than general conflict/political persecution. And also about the brick wall.

LGBT-related judgements here, out of interest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top